Gay Rights And Century 21

Gay Rights And Century 21
Vol: 14 Issue: 28 Thursday, November 28, 2002

Pennsylvania became the most recent in a long line of states who have passed special protection legislation to protect homosexuals and homosexual conduct by issuing homosexuals privileged minority status.

The bill, which passed the House on Tuesday by a vote of 118 to 79, adds ”ancestry, mental or physical disability, sexual orientation, gender or gender identity” to the state’s Ethnic Intimidation law, which already raises the grade of crimes motivated by hatred against victims because of their race, color, religion or national origin.

Although the bill’s opponents argued the bill violated the principle of equal justice for all in a fierce 90 minute debate, the bill passed 118 to 79.

“With this law, we’re stripping away the blindfold which has been used for centuries to indicate that Lady Justice doesn’t see the person who committed the crime but is only considering the facts,” said Rep. Allan Egolf, R-Landisburg.

“We should be looking at the crime … not trying to decide what the thoughts were of the perpetrator,” he added.

WND columnist Felicia Dionisio noted that opponents worry the law could be enforced too liberally to include, among other things, preachers quoting passages from the Bible against homosexual activity.

William Devlin, of the Urban Family Council, sees it the same way.

He says although hate-crimes legislation isn’t unusual, a bill that specifically mentions speech and verbal harassment with “malicious intent” is unusual.

“This bill is so broad, that if you have an attender at your church who feels offended or intimidated by what is said from the pulpit, you and your church leadership will be receiving certified letters inviting you to either a deposition or a court appearance,” he said.

Although hate-crimes legislation isn’t unusual, a bill that specifically mentions speech and verbal harassment with “malicious intent” is unusual.

“This bill is so broad, that if you have an attender at your church who feels offended or intimidated by what is said from the pulpit, you and your church leadership will be receiving certified letters inviting you to either a deposition or a court appearance,” Devlin said.

Also very interesting about this piece of legislation are its champions. Not just the usual gay rights lobby, but also Stewart Greenleaf, the chair of the Pennsylvania Senate Judiciary Committee. Greenleaf claims to be a born-again Christian and was formerly a deacon in the American Presbyterian Church.

The bill, which passed the Senate last year, 32-15, now heads for the desk of Gov. Mark Schweiker, who has promised to sign it.

Assessment:

Similar legislation extending protected minority status to homosexuals in recent months include Maryland, Vermont, Florida and elsewhere. In other states, the issue of extending special status to homosexuals is deeply divisive.

Conservative lawmakers in Kentucky, noting with alarm the number of cities and counties in the state banning discrimination against sexual orientation, are preparing to push for passage of a statewide law next year that would prohibit adoption of local gay civil rights ordinances.

The Kentucky Post reports Democratic State Rep. Tom Kerr has begun drafting a bill that would forbid counties and municipalities from granting legal protection to gay men and lesbians and would void local gay-rights laws already in place.

Setting everything else aside, all arguments from all quarters, there remains one burning question. If protected minority status is extended based on lifestyle choices, what does that mean for members of actual minorities, like blacks or Latinos? If one can become a ‘minority by declaration’ so to speak, then what actual protection is actually there?

If a well-educated white male of European origin can compete on an even footing with disadvantaged minorities simply by claiming gay rights equality, then where is the protection for the disadvantaged minority?

What will be the determining factor? A black American or a Latino American’s minority status is self-evident – that is why protected status is extended in the first place. A homosexual’s minority status kicks in when he decides he wants to claim it. So would a straight white male of European origin, should he want to avail himself of it. And new laws passed to protect homosexuals who announce their sexual preference also forbid anyone from teasing the straight guy that decided he was tired of standing at the end of the line.

Now, to the real argument. It is already illegal in many places, including Canada, to call homosexual conduct a sin. The Bible says otherwise. Leviticus 18:22 calls it an ‘abomination’. Genesis 13-19 tells the story of the destruction of Sodom. Sodom’s sin was rampant homosexuality, although new ‘scholarship’ says that interpretation is ‘erroneous’ and ‘homophobic’.

Really? How come all the new gay rights laws specifically remove ‘sodomy’ from states’ criminal codes?

But Deuteronomy 23:17 demolishes this revisionist argument, leaving no doubt what the sin of Sodom was.

“There shall be no whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite of the sons of Israel.”

The argument that homosexuality is a genetic predisposition seems powerful to the layman — many Christians are being convinced by the alleged science behind it. And those who can’t quite ignore the OT but still want to be politically correct point out that the Old Testament Law was fulfilled at the Cross. (That’s the exasperated, ‘We don’t stone homosexuals anymore, do we?’ argument.

But the New Testament provides no hint that God changed His mind.

“For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.” (Romans 1:26-27)

It is illegal to connect that ‘recompence of their error’ that Paul says was ‘meet’ (appropriate) with the fact the AIDS epidemic is officially traced back to Patient Zero, a homosexual flight attendant who frequented gay bath houses at each port of call. Or that it is an epidemic against which the only protection is a Godly, monogamous lifestyle. (And no exposure via medical procedures, I know. But where did the infected blood plasma supply come from in the first place?)

Paul continues, “Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.” (Romans 1:28-32)

That’s a pretty strong New Testament admonition, as I read it. Again, there are revisionists who argue that it doesn’t mean what it says — read it yourself.

I may well be breaking the law in sending this issue of the Omega Letter Intelligence Digest in the place where you live because I am not pretending the Bible is incorrect on this issue.

But I would be breaking God’s Law if I did. “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:” (2 Timothy 3:16)

I might even be labeled a ‘homophobe’ — whatever that means. I am not afraid of homosexuals. I am afraid FOR them. “Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them,” Paul says.

In reacting to this kind of legislation, it is easy to sound hateful, and is it easy to make the case that Christians hate homosexuals. Sadly, in some cases, I have observed evidence to support that charge in some individual Christians.

We are admonished to hate sin, but to love the sinner and to pray for his salvation. A homosexual may be brainwashed into believing that his particular sin is the result of God’s error in programming his genetic program, but the fact is, it is the result of the enemy combining lust and rebellion into a potent sin cocktail that is more difficult for some to resist than it is others.

James says, “Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man: But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death. Do not err, my beloved brethren.” (James 1:14-16)

It is the duty of the Christian to recognize the sin for what it is, but to pray for the sinner.

In any case, it is a moot point. Nowhere in the Bible, in either Testament, has the authority to declare sin to be sinless been delegated to an act of human legislation.

This entry was posted in Briefings by Pete Garcia. Bookmark the permalink.

About Pete Garcia

Christian, father, husband, veteran, pilot, and sinner saved by grace. I am a firm believer in, and follower of Jesus Christ. I am Pre-Trib, Dispensational, and Non-Denominational (but I lean Southern Baptist).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s