Wednesday, December 21, 2011

A Christmas Message to our Detractors

Dear Anonymous Commentors,

Merry Christmas! We love you! Nothing you write to us can keep us from valuing you as God's precious children. We wish and hope the very best for you in the truest sense of the word charity. "Charity. . . is the pure love of Christ, a love so centered in righteousness that the possessor has no aim or desire except for the eternal welfare of his own soul and for the souls of those around him" (Bruce R. McConkie).

We are grateful you read our blog and visit our web site. We show another side of this issue you are missing because you have been influenced by the licentious, secular world around you and are being shamelessly exploited. Indeed, there are a dozen views about anything important until you know the answer. Then there is only one correct view -- the truth.

The truth is often uncomfortable, even extremely painful. It may sound stodgy, preachy, or harsh. But people who really care about truth and about the worth of souls will stand for reality and righteousness no matter how unpopular it is.

About church leaders, we will say once again, obviously there is a lack of unity on this issue. You are ignoring the Holy Scriptures, the Spirit, and a mountain of prophetic warnings if you really think the orthodox LDS Church has accepted homosexuality even in theory as normal and healthy. If some superficial concessions have been made here and there for those who find themselves experiencing same-sex sexual attractions, you might want to consider that the enormous pressure that has been leveled against every church, and Biblical religion in general, could be the cause rather than any official embrace of the false and foolish idea that sane, accountable people cannot heal from abuses, reject falsehoods, and learn to school their sexual feelings, thoughts, and desires. Indeed, this principle is required of all of us.

We believe in the immeasurable worth of souls and their great potential. We believe you deserve the truth.We know there is a way back for those precious individuals who have been taken in by the insidious modern abstraction of a very old vice.

Keep reading and Lord bless.

Friday, December 9, 2011

Support for last post

In the middle of reviewing a book by Arthur Goldberg, Light in the Closet, Torah, Homosexuality and the Power to Change, 2008, we had to post this great quote that supports our last post.

[T]he challenges of living in sexual propriety apply to every Jew, not just homosexuals, and to every person, not just Jews. For a man or woman burdened with an "irresistible" attraction for the opposite sex -- or with any other variety of sexual brokenness -- it is no easier to avoid self indulgence than for a gay man or woman to shun same-sex contacts and fantasies. Certainly no Jew, no person, has the right or the authority to amend the Torah to allow for his or her own (or other persons') special sexual "needs." To believe the contrary might be soothing, but it is plainly delusional.

Friday, December 2, 2011

How about UPOGA: Understanding Premarital Opposite-Gender Attraction?

We have an idea for a new student group to meet at BYU every Thursday night. It's called Understanding Premarital Opposite-Gender Attraction, UPOGA. There is a real need because a lot of students have all sorts of problems with this, and if they could just meet together with others who are struggling, it would make them feel so much better.

There are several kinds of students who need this support group. Kids with POGA come from all sorts of backgrounds. But all have these sexual thoughts and feelings that give them their primary identity and the Church won't let them indulge in them. This causes all kinds of trauma and some are forced to escape into pornography, masturbation, and are even suicidal. Those who slip up and do act out sexually on their premarital opposite-gender attractions are left feeling horribly guilty and ashamed, but they can't seem to stop. After all, it's natural and normal to have sexual feelings and scientists say resisting them is unhealthy. The Church causes even more trauma because of the conflict these poor people must endure between their religion's rules and who they are as sexual beings.

Those with POGA who biologically can't control their sexual thoughts, feelings, and/or the spectrum of consequent sexual behaviors causing them all kinds of unhealthy trauma and conflict here and now, just want to have fun, aren't ready to get married yet, or haven't met the person they want to marry. But there are others. These are POGA students who have lost all hope of marriage. They don't get asked on dates, have never even had a boyfriend or girlfriend and are certain they never will. Others have intentionally decided against ever getting married. They have lost faith in the institution because of the high divorce rate or traumatic personal experiences with their parents' divorces. Others just can't see themselves committing to all that responsibility that marriage and family entails. Some have made up their minds they will not bring children into this sad, suffering world; there are those who have even had themselves sterilized. Some young women are on the pill as a matter of principle, in hopeful preparation for when rules against premarital sex are abolished.

All these POGA students have one thing in common. They feel it is silly and unfair that sex must be linked to marriage/mating. As things now stand they must resign themselves to secrecy, guilt, conflict, and shame, or being celibate, some for the rest of their lives. They need a sexual support group. Although we may not agree with some of their beliefs and ideas, we are called upon to tolerate and respect them. It would really help if they could meet with like-minded similarly sexually-frustrated students.

The Honor Code states that people at BYU "may not influence or seek to influence others to engage in behavior inconsistent with the Honor Code," but this group wouldn't do that. Or would it? What would they discuss at these meetings? What influences would the group be exposed to?

Well, they would surely talk about how they can't help who they are and what they feel. They'd discuss the healthfulness and acceptability of premarital sex. They'd keep abreast of the great new methods of pregnancy and disease prevention that have paved the way for "safe sex." They'd bring up books to read and movies to see that promote premarital sex, so as to make their members feel accepted and comfortable with their feelings.

And the social aspect alone! The loneliness and lovelessness these unfulfilled young people feel can be overwhelming. It would be so great if they could hook up with people who feel the same way: that prohibiting premarital sex is cruel and intolerant and heterophobic.

They'll share stories about the difficulties they've had with religious extremists and fundamentalists in their own church who insist on foisting old-fashioned ideas about chastity on them, and the unConstitutional sexual orientation discrimination they feel. They'll plan ways to get the Honor Code changed to gradually allow premarital sex, step by step. They'll talk about putting pressure on the whole Church and enlightening the culture to come out of the dark ages and catch up with the world.

They'd arrange panels of older and more experienced sufferers of POGA who would give them sex-centered words to live by, strategies for alleviating at least some of their sexual frustrations while technically keeping the Honor Code, and hope in a brighter future society when sex would be allowed and equally available for all people regardless of marital status.

They'd prepare arguments like, if they could just release their sexual tensions by practicing premarital sex with the support of the Church, the school, their families, friends, and society as a whole, they would do better in school, avoid hopeless suicidality, and be freed from the oppressive cultural pressure toward the lifelong commitment of marriage and family. They could even dream up future programs that would provide needed sexual love experiences on demand, anonymously if desired, and free of commitment, responsibility, or guilt feelings. Their goal would be to promote understanding why premarital sex is normal and natural and must be allowed equally for everyone.


Okay, we hope you get the message. We don't mean to make light of the seriousness of sex or truly compare male-female fornication with maladaptive homosexual behavior. Nor do we wish to belittle the very real problem of unwanted homosexual tendencies. We just mean to point out how BYU's USGA (Understanding Same-Gender Attraction) group does break the Honor Code by influencing or seeking to influence students toward unchaste (and inordinately risky) behaviors. We have attended one of these meetings. Our impression is that they are based on the affirming of homosexuality, serve as a place to meet, make friends, and/or act out with like-minded and similarly tempted people, provide a forum in which to address sexuality-based grievances, present homosexual behaviors in a positive light (we witnessed this firsthand), and mean to usurp existing standards of morality. And worst of all, the group doesn't offer any hope or help at all in overcoming unwanted same-gender attraction.

Thursday, December 1, 2011

Looking Back on Lot's Wife

Why did Lot's wife look back on Sodom and Gomorrah? Why was that so bad that she was turned into a pillar of salt? We'd like to suggest the reason.

To review, when Abraham couldn't find even ten righteous people in the twin cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, his nephew Lot was told to gather his family and leave because the Lord was going to have the whole place destroyed. He was told not to look back. Lot obeyed and took his wife and daughters. On the way out of town, Lot's wife did something that can give us some important insight into our own hearts. But first let's use our imaginations a little and set the stage, assuming she was not among the very wicked.

Sodom was where Lot's wife lived. It was her home, where she was raising her family. She probably went to some sort of church, belonged to ladies' groups, had friends she loved and regular activities she participated in. Sure, there was a lot of wickedness going on, but her friends didn't seem to think it was wicked at all and she had learned to look the other way. It was just the way things were. You got used to it.

Then the Lord said they had to leave. We assume Lot's wife knew why. It was pretty bad. People were totally ignoring God and His laws according to Abraham and all the ancient teachings and prophets, and spreading bad ideas and acting up in all sorts of lawless ways. Of course she had to go with her husband and family, especially since the place was going to be destroyed.

On the way out of town, Lot's wife turned back for one last look at everything she had called home going up in smoke. And in that moment of hesitation, we are told she was turned into a pillar of salt. Why did she look back and why did she seem to self-destruct, to lose her soul?

Maybe at the last moment something pulled on Lot's wife's heartstrings. Perhaps it suddenly hit her what she was leaving behind and how her friends were dying. Sure, there was some wickedness, but this was her home, her church, these were her good friends, this was her life. Was it really so bad as that? It was a moment of weakness, but apparently a character-defining one, one that revealed what kind of person she really was. Perhaps she was a bit too comfortable living in Sodom and Gomorrah. Maybe she cherished it as her real home. Maybe she was sorry to leave it, deep down. Maybe she realized she would rather have stayed there than have to start all over again in a new place with new friends. Maybe she didn't mind the wicked environment, so long as she had her life and her comforts, so long as her own family was righteous. Maybe she was sorry for all the wrong reasons.

Now, what if you and I lived in Sodom and Gomorrah? Oh, wait, we do. We've been told the world is even more wicked now than it was then. Would we be sorry if the Lord told us we had to leave? Would our thoughts betray us? As in . . .

Sure, there's some goofy stuff going on, but there's a lot of good stuff mixed in. Why should we miss out? Besides, we do pretty well looking the other way. Maybe the destruction thing is only a bluff. Surely the Lord wouldn't destroy all our friends. Emphasize the positive, overlook the negative, we always say!

Do we tend to tidy up the reality of the wickedness occurring so we can go on with our daily routines, enjoy our entertainments and activities, keep all our friends and associations, advance in our standing and positions?

Well, we prefer to call that being non-judgmental.
We take a lot of pride in being non-judgmental. Isn't that what Jesus was all about, just loving everybody and being tolerant and respectful of all beliefs and ideas? Just live and let live? Maybe the bad ideas and behaviors will go away if we ignore them.

Would we be reluctant to leave it all behind if the Lord commanded us to, even though we knew it was wicked beyond repair?

Well, why not? It isn't so bad once you've gotten used to it!

If we did decide to obey, would we look back in a moment of weakness and regret?

How could we resist? It would be so unfeeling seeing as how it was the home we loved and was about to be destroyed!

It seems we mustn't get too comfortable with the ways of the world. In fact, we'd best forsake Sodom and Gomorrah now, deep down in our hearts. Our hearts need changing, if they haven't been, and then they need continual turning back to God. Imperfect and in need of a Savior as we all are, we can still be certain where our real treasure lies and where our true loyalties are. On important unchanging issues we can know what is right and what is wrong. Come what may, we can be firm in our beliefs. We can practice loving God more than any earthly thing, feel His love, and never look back.

Tuesday, November 29, 2011

The Danger of Modern Elitism

We have gotten a great swell of responses to our latest email, "What's Happening at BYU?" We figure that for every three comments are two emotional, derisive, rude, sanctimonious, kill-the messenger, or in-denial comments to one intelligent, thoughtful, excellent, and supportive comment. This isn't surprising because our opposition has always been very vocal and defensive, while our supporters are usually pretty quiet and confident, maybe too quiet and confident.

According to these responses, all is not well in Zion. For one thing, we have been dismayed to see an ugly thread of modern elitism running through the fabric of our church culture. What is elitism? A sense of superiority. In religious terms, we could call it the evil of pride. What we've seen in many of these emails is a strange version of just that. It's incredible. To those people living today who think themselves superior in intellect and morals to all that has gone before, ask yourself the following questions we've borrowed from the French medieval satirist Rabelais (1483-1553); apparently there have been elitists in every age:

Why is it commonly said nowadays that the world is no longer foolish and ignorant? Would you infer from this that the world which was once foolish has now turned wise and enlightened? What conditions, and how many, did it require to make it foolish? And what conditions, and how many, were necessary to make it wise? Why was it foolish? Why should it become wise? By what signs did you recognize its former folly? By what signs do you affirm its present wisdom? Who made it foolish? Who has made it wise? Which were more numerous, those who loved it when it was foolish or those who love it now that it is wise? For how long was it foolish? For how long will it stay wise? What did its former folly spring from? What are the roots of its present wisdom? Why did its ancient folly come to an end at this time and no later? Why did its present wisdom begin now and not before? What harm came of its former folly? What good can we expect of its present wisdom? How can its ancient folly have been abolished? How can its present wisdom have been restored?

Of course the answer is that man is a fallen creature, always has been and always will be, tending to be foolish and prone to wander from the strait and narrow. The only reliable source of wisdom and goodness is God, the Light of Christ, the Holy Spirit of Truth, which has always existed and continues to exist in order to be sought, rediscovered, and cherished with each new generation in each individual mind and heart.

But for the elitist these are good hard questions -- for a modern homosexualist, for example, who thinks he, here and now, in his fallen, mortal state, less than a pinprick in God's vast, expanding, inexplicable universe, has somehow earned an unprecedented position of enlightenment. Yes, he thinks his present invented worldview trumps the accumulated wisdom of the ages, including Holy Scripture. One reader, who now accepts homosexuality not as sinful anymore but as a harmless, normal, and immutable condition, called this new worldview "a broadened understanding." That right there is modern elitism. It's a false superiority, unthinking and soul-less, a law unto itself. Does anyone notice how it melds so conveniently with our modern politically correct and licentious world? Does anyone notice that it sacrifices precious lost souls on its secular altar? Does anyone notice that it pits a currently fashionable worldview against God and His ageless, unchanging truths? Do people really want to put themselves in that position? Where is the foundation?

Children learn that only a foolish man builds his house on the sand. If we abandon (in spoken or unspoken ways) God's time-tested objective standards for truth and goodness, what do we have left but to be swept away from anything solid, tossed to and fro with every wind of doctrine, drowned in a nonbenevolent sea of groundless human whims, tastes, and trends that happen to be popular in our short time on earth.

Law, Sin, Repentance, Divine Redemption. These are real. "Gay is good" is a harmful and dangerous fad fabricated and defended by the narcissistic elitists of our particular time.

Monday, October 3, 2011

Food for Thought from Flannery O'Connor

The following quotes and notes are taken from Spiritual Writings by and about  famous author and devout Catholic Flannery O'Connor (1925-1964), edited by Robert Ellsberg with an intro by Richard Giannone to make of what you will. I think she's absolutely wonderful and right on. All in italics are Flannery's.

What people don't realize is how much religion costs. They think faith is a big electric blanket when of course it is the cross. 

This notion that grace is healing omits the fact that before it heals, it cuts with the sword Christ said he came to bring.

 The herd has been known to be right, in which case the one who leaves it is doing evil. When the herd is wrong, the one who leaves it is not doing evil but the right thing.
Subtlety is the curse of man. It is not found in deity.

Some people when they lose their faith in Christ, substitute a swollen faith in themselves.

 "Christianity is not a matter of feeling good or cultural conditioning. O'Connor's maternal solicitude extends from challenging the highfalutin intellectual on abstractions to correcting the smugness of Christians who have no idea what their faith is all about."

Christ never said that the Church would be operated in a sinless or intelligent way, but that it would not teach error.  This does not mean that each and every priest won't teach error but that the whole Church speaking through the pope will not teach error in matters of faith.

The cultural climate should make no difference in what the Church teaches.

The Church stands for and preserves always what is larger than human understanding.

All around you today you will find people accepting 'religion' that has been rid of its religious elements.

Redemption is meaningless unless there is cause for it in the actual life we live, and for the last few centuries there has been operating in our culture the secular belief that there is no such cause.

Some effects of modern liberalism: turning religion into poetry and therapy, making truth vaguer and more relative, banishing intellectual distinctions, depending on feelings instead of thought.

Christianity is a continual turning to God and away from egocentricity.

"Only by recovering a strong sense of the devil and personal sin can Christians be true to Christ.

Our obliviousness to evil gives the enemies of God free reign to do their work.

I identify the devil as the devil and not some psychological tendency.

"She could not stomach the sugary slice of inspirational pie, which she felt confused the inner and outer worlds, falsified the stumbling blocks in the path of faith, and trivialized the pain of drawing close to God."

The Christian [should] accept sin as sin, not sickness or accident of environment, but as a responsible choice of offense against God which involves his eternal future.

Either one is serious about salvation or is not.

Well, God rescues us from ourselves if we want Him to.

"The vaporization of religion happens when the Church is stripped of its certainties and becomes another Elks Club."

The operation of the Church is set up for the sinner; which creates much misunderstanding among the smug.

The liberal approach is that man has never fallen, never incurred guilt, and is ultimately perfectable by his own efforts. Therefore evil in this light is a problem of better housing, sanitation, health, etc., and all evil will eventually be obliterated.

In the absence of faith we govern by tenderness, which ends up as terror.

Christianity doesn't rest finally in any stable kind of solution. It ought to throw you back on the living God.

"Her stories were not a matter of Do Unto Others. She felt that could be found in any ethical culture series. They were about the fact of the Word made flesh."

Saturday, September 24, 2011

Compassion or Naivety?

The following is a comment we received after posting "The Pursuit of Happiness and the Fatal Principle." From what appears to be another Anonymous to whom we cannot reply directly, it looks like more of a general reaction to our efforts at SoL than a comment on the post, but we felt it was a sincere and somewhat respectful comment and wanted to respond.

These "immoral" people may be acting selfishly, but most of them are doing so out of a deficit of self usually stemming from woundedness from childhood. The deficit has kept them from coalescing a whole personality and kept them fixated at an early stage of emotional development focused on their genitals and gratification thereof. How do you ensure that children grow up unwounded and whole? You cannot legislate it. You describe it as it is...a tragedy, an incompleteness, a wound. You describe it and describe and keep describing it. Then maybe they will stop seeing it as a hateful attack on their selfhood which gets you nowhere. You can work hard or you can work smart and actually accomplish something besides getting validation from the people who already see what you see.

Dear Anonymous,
Thank you for the thoughtful comment. Here is our response.

Homosexuality is immoral and harmful, no matter what the causes. While we can't and shouldn't judge people as immortal souls, we can and should judge between good and evil. Homosexuality is a symptom of what may be a myriad of numerous larger problems and sins, from the tragic early sexual abuse you mention to a prideful rebellion against goodness/God.

Especially if homosexuality is a symptom of emotional/mental illness, or if it is specifically unwanted, it follows that we should at least offer help so it is available. Despite great success in this area, cutting-edge reparative or re-orientation therapy is now highly politically incorrect, discouraged, dismissed, and denigrated. The APA compromised its professionalism by removing homosexuality from its manual of disorders back in 1973 due to pressure from gay activists, and now there is actually a movement to prevent professional therapists from treating people who specifically wish to get to the roots of and overcome homosexual tendencies. Increasingly and in all facets of our mainstream society and institutions, no opposition to homosexuality is allowed.

You should know that, according to widespread gay activism standards, your comment about gays being "wounded," possessing "a deficit of self'," being "incomplete," "fixated," or a "tragedy," would be considered highly homophobic, intolerant, bigoted, and hateful, truly an "attack on their selfhood," the very thing you have accused us of. Having achieved mainstream acceptance, this movement now demands celebration and nurturance of homosexuality (and all related identities and corresponding behaviors) as normal, natural, and good. And many young, vulnerable, rebellious, damaged, or confused individuals are being recruited and exploited to further this cause.

Here at SoL we have come to recognize the "compassion" you show as counterproductive. One of the travesties of our modern age is that the devil is being mistaken for this or that psychological tendency. People deeply involved in sinfulness (for whatever reason) who are flattered and coddled, who are not taught about human nature and the nature of God, will make no lasting or significant progress, at least not that kind that followers of Christ should be concerned with. Merely describing a malady ad infinitum as woundedness is like wallowing in the mud. It gives no guidance or help or ideal. How can people transcend their troubles without hope for something better? In addition, we see your suggestion to refer to homosexualism as damage or deficiency while hoping for a different response from the gay community, as the definition of insanity. Not only is this viewpoint considered homophobic, it is extremely naive to hope these people will understand another point of view or change just because you keep saying how sorry you are for them. They are taught to hate pity, but are patient, knowing that it is just a step toward embrace.

As with alcoholism, pornography and drug addiction, people focused on homosexual lust have to want to change. Many don't want to see things another way and obviously don't want it known that change is possible, or all their justifications for homosex would fall apart. However one gets into it, sin is pleasurable both in thought and deed, at least for a time. To borrow from C. S. Lewis, real love seeks to offer eternal truth and divine repentance, rather than shallow, self-serving, and misguided human comfort and sympathy. To borrow from Flannery O'Connor, real charity is hard and endures.

Our goal at SoL is to educate on what is happening in our society in order to counteract these trends in one's own sphere of influence and responsibility, and to point out the best resources for families and individuals confronted with unwanted sexual problems, all with a timeless Christ-centered approach. We do the work as best we can for the best reasons we know, and leave it up to God whether we "accomplish something"or not.

Monday, September 19, 2011

Hung Up on the Gay Thing

"I'm worried about you; you're so hung up on the gay thing."

"Why this particular issue? There are more important problems."

"For your own sake, you shouldn't be so involved in this."

"Everything you say is colored by your stance on homosexuality."

When people make disparaging comments like these about our involvement in fighting the gay movement, we think they are saying more about themselves than about us. The truth is, our efforts make them uncomfortable. Perhaps they feel a twinge of guilt because they aren't doing something. They would rather nobody spoke out against this particular evil, or perhaps against any evil at all. These types of issues are too divisive, too controversial, too difficult. Can't we just ignore it?

The answer is no, we can't ignore it. You're either on one side or the other of this war between good and evil, and right now the evil side is winning. Guess which side the sleepy, unwitting people who say the above things are on, whether they realize it or not? Yes, the evil side. Case in point: read those opening comments again. The same people who say these dismissive things to us would never say them to a determined openly gay person (that is, anyone claiming to be gay, sympathizing with or advocating gayness). Could be they are afflicted with that spineless fickleness that causes people to side with the winner just because they're winning.

Of course SoL is not just about the gay thing at all. There's a much bigger picture we try to keep foremost in our minds. We're about human nature versus the nature of God, the Lord versus the Devil, truth versus error, great spiritual goodness versus great spiritual wickedness. The cultural embrace of sexual immorality of all kinds is just one of the symptoms of a debauched and anti-Christ society that no longer believes in such things as sin and the need for divine redemption. Exposing the insidious gay agenda, so stealthy, so ubiquitous, and so harmful, especially to the souls of youth, to health, to posterity, to marriage, to the family, and to religious freedom, just happens to be the corner of the battlefield in which we find ourselves.

Christianity isn't for the faint of heart. First you have to be on the right side and stay there, which is a continuous personal struggle. And then you have to fight evil, wherever it rears its head, come what may.  Some may call it being hung up.We call it speaking up for truth and goodness and Christ in our own small way with the resources we possess. We can't be everywhere in the war against evil, but at least we're somewhere.

In what corner of the battlefield are you?

Wednesday, September 7, 2011

Sinned Against? Or Sinning?

People today don't like the word sin. It denotes that there are absolutes, as in right and wrong. This is strange because these same people do not hesitate in using this concept of sin, of right and wrong, to describe others. Oh, they might use different words like un-Christlike or unkind or bigoted or hateful or intolerant. But they mean the same thing: You are doing something wrong; you are sinning against others.

The question we must all ask ourselves when we feel we have been sinned against is: Is there anything I have done wrong myself? But this charitable self-examination is especially absent among, for example, the gay community. Self-identified gays are always the sinned against. Why? Because it's a big part of the gay movement to make everyone believe they are victims of an evil, unaccepting society, that it's all about love and wholesomeness, and that anyone against gayness is evil, the real sinner. (This tactic is undeniably documented in dozens of gay organizations' written materials. A great resource is A Queer Thing Happened to America, by Michael L. Brown, 2011.)

It's interesting that you never hear gays decrying pornography of any kind, even though most people still think pornography is at least sleazy. That's because it is a staple of gay sexual orientation and the gay lifestyle; you have to feed the dragon for it to stay alive. And you never hear anybody asking gays about using pornography, either, or about what they think about and where they go and who they hang out with and what they do. That's because nobody dares ask them anything. They get a wink and a pass for all kinds of really bad ideas and really bad behavior and the advocating of it to others, even youth.

Christianity is about working to overcome our own wrongs through the grace of Christ rather than dwelling on the wrongs done us. On this basis alone, when so-called mohos (Mormon homosexuals) come out in testimony meetings, claim victim mentality, write books and blogs, proclaim that God has called them to lead the rest of us to enlightenment, and are in all ways loud and proud about their sexuality ("celibate" or not, at the moment), they are not being Christian at all, but rather thumbing their noses at God and Goodness.

But let's take this thought even farther. We submit that though we are all sinned against in a myriad of ways, we are all sinners, too. Giving a free pass to those who claim immunity from the sin of sexual impurity because they are "same-sex attracted" and allowing them to pass the blame to others is just another of our sins. It's the sin of enabling, even encouraging, souls to sin. When we do this we show we don't care a pin for their immortal souls. They are indeed sinners, and in a different way so are we. Who is to say which type of sin is worse?

Tuesday, August 2, 2011

What Ever Happened to Do What is Right, Let the Consequence Follow?

Do what is right, be faithful and fearless . . .
Do what is right, let the consequence follow . . .
Truth goeth onward then do what is right . . .

Along with the congregation, we sang these words of this old hymn in church this past Sunday. As far as we could see everybody's mouths were moving. But outside such meetings, when it comes to standing against our popular culture of embracing same-sex sexual immorality, many good LDS people, along with people of all denominations, aren't choosing the right. We aren't choosing the right because we are afraid of the consequences. We would rather offend God than offend some of the human beings we know.

Yes, in this culture war choosing the right is often more difficult than remaining silent or giving in. It takes courage. It takes faith. It takes willingness to suffer the consequences, such as being misunderstood, mistreated, and marginalized, yes, even by one's own brothers and sisters in the previously safe and unified confines of one's own church congregation where we all used to believe the same things.

Recent real life events serve as cases in point:

A former president of a local LDS ward's women's Relief Society organization was asked to give a presentation at a small monthly luncheon for older women. But when she revealed what her topic would be (teaching the rising generation the truth about male and female, natural gender roles, and marriage in accordance with official Church doctrine) she was summarily UNinvited. On top of that, she was given a letter in which her perceived faults and failings were illuminated.

(But it's worse than that. It's not just the silencing of the truth in church we need to be worried about. It's purposeful and insidious false teachings. Read on.)

Visiting teachers assigned to a member in this same LDS ward embellished a lesson on families to include how lesbians make wonderful parents and then lectured the woman in her own home on "love" and "reality" when she brought up how the scriptures condemn such behavior and how it is harmful to children.

In a Sunday Relief Society lesson on families, the instructor taught that families come in all types that are all equally effective and to be encouraged and valued, that it takes a village to raise a child, and admonished the women several times to keep an open mind. To quote, “Heavenly Father loves all types of families. We have a huge diversity and we have to be aware of what’s coming up.” Some of the comments bolstered this approach. One was. “A family is any group of people centered on the same goal.”

(But it gets even worse.)

When given the opportunity, those in positions of authority chose not to confront or correct these incidents. For example, a leader in this ward who had been notified of the above trends gave a good secular-type lesson on the rising statistics of premarital sex among opposite sexes and offered the usual secular-type preventatives. (Get rid of the blankets in your media room!) But he never spoke a word about the dangers of same-sex porn, or same-sex temptations, or same-sex experimentation, even though it comes of the same impulse and these kids' world is saturated with the normalization and celebration of homosexuality!

Not only does this marked omission throw a lot of especially vulnerable kids under the bus (which might include every kid these days), it also sets a fatal principle to work. When we give something like homosexuality a pass, we open the doors for licentiousness in general, and as a result all important basic gospel principles get tossed aside. Given the shocking stats this leader so unabashedly threw out, that's what's happening in a dramatic way. (Otherwise, for instance, kids would recognize the Spirit teaching and warning them against sexual activity.)

What? You think kids don't make the connection between gay-is-good and premarital-sex-in-general-is-good? Think again. They know that gayness, which increasingly targets youth, is all about sex and sexuality. So if gayness is okay, why not every other kind of sex? In fact, we hear that bisexual acting out among young girls, age 12-13, is the newest rage.

Unless we do what is right, regardless of the temporal and social consequences to ourselves, the anything-goes sexual revolution, without hindrance, and with encouragement, will come to a house of worship near you, and maybe to your own house, too. Those houses will fall in one way or another. Are we ready?

Tuesday, May 10, 2011

Causes and Effects

Nothing is just itself, wrote a favorite author of ours. Regarding issues of any importance, we certainly agree. Everything of concern happening in our world today has causes and effects.

Here is a case in point. Today on the radio we heard about a study regarding hormonal birth control that found that women using these prescriptions were being affected in unimagined ways, and men were being affected too. Apparently, along with a basic knowledge of the birds and the bees that parents pass on to their children in spoken and unspoken ways, there are natural chemicals that encourage males and females to mate. But what if these chemicals are messed with, even obliterated? What would the effects be?

We know that hormonal birth control is a huge business and commonly used. Birth control pills or patches prevent ovulation, and consequently prevent pregnancy. Some women are now taking birth control pills just to prevent having to deal with their monthly periods. Is it worth the convenience?

This study is showing that when women no longer ovulate, they apparently don't release that mating chemical. Not only do these women have decreased sexual attraction for men, men also have less sexual attraction for women. It makes sense and could sure explain a lot of trends that have occurred since the 1970s when messing with hormones for birth control became widespread. Apparently, birth control pills are not just birth control pills. They are having a profound effect on more than just controlling pregnancy.

Take away the hormones that naturally encourage males and females to mate, and the desire to mate will decrease. For example, if the sexes are now less attractive to each other because we have obliterated the mating hormone, but people still think they need sex (as they are taught by our oversexed culture), they are going to be fine with finding it elsewhere other than marriage.

Think about what the birth control pill may be doing to marriage, the divorce rate, natural gender roles, the size of families, the main purpose of sex, and the sexual development of young people. Then combine this with radical feminism, homosexualism, and cultural negativity toward natural gender roles, marriage, morality, fidelity, and posterity. What are the results?

Some might very well be: people are getting married later in life or not at all, the divorce rate has skyrocketed, marriage is mocked and degraded, natural gender roles are ignored and denied, couples put off having children and/or have smaller families, sex has been reduced to a casual meaningless pleasure disconnected from mating, marriage, and family, people indulge in sex indiscriminately with whomever, whenever, however, and divorce, abortions, sexual abuse, and sex crimes increase. And there are probably many more.

Without our foundation firmly placed on truth and reality, we've lost our moorings. Such are the effects of pretending we can change reality and ignore responsibility.

Thursday, May 5, 2011

Does Publishing Truth and Goodness Pay?

We here at SoL have been accused by our detractors (some of whom you would never suspect would be our detractors) over the years of trying to make a name for ourselves, in it for the money, marketing our wares, etc. Well, here are the facts.

Aside from an occasional kind and encouraging word from a few valiant souls near and far, we are regularly silenced, ignored, rejected, vilified, and hated by strangers and "friends" alike, near and far. Even most good people do not want to help or give us opportunities to help. They are just too afraid to support us in any way including morally or financially. In other words, most people nowadays are quiet because of intimidation, fear, and misinformation. To put it bluntly, they care more about not offending other people than about offending God, although they proclaim the opposite, little realizing they are practicing the worst kind of hypocrisy. (Sorry if this sounds harsh. It is true. Truth is often hard, but in the end it sets us free.)

We could write a book on the misadventures we've had among the "faithful." Among other excuses, some have said this is because we are on the wrong side of the fence. But there is overwhelming proof to the contrary which we dare not deny. Again, when Satan is stirring people up against good, we must be stirred up against evil.

As for money, aside from a few sporadic unsolicited donations, the great majority of our funds have been derived from our personal resources. We do not sell advertising. We do not get paid and don't expect to be the way things are. The website and blog are kept up by unpaid volunteers. This work is done in our free time, apart from our unrelated occupations that provide our living. We always knew SoL would cost us in many ways, and it has. We volunteer our time and talents, putting out particularly big chunks of time, effort, and money to get books produced and printed, and the best we hope for is to break even financially. If not, so be it.

Come what may, in today's secularized, politically correct world, in a godless, oversexed culture which increasingly doubts both fact and value, in a lawless system that mocks reality, sexualizes children younger and younger, and threatens religious freedom, we have carved out a tiny corner in which to publish much-neglected goodness and truth. Sad to say in the greater sense, it doesn't pay.

Rather than suspecting us of selfish motives, why not mourn with us that publishing truth and goodness (even with charity, intelligence, and creativity) is now one of the most unpopular and unprofitable things one can do?

Monday, April 25, 2011

Gay, Bay, Tray, Fay, Pay, Day, Ray, Say, May!

If same-sex sexual attractions alone are not sinful and do not make one unworthy before the Church and before God (as goes the argument), how about these other types of sexual attractions? We’ve come up with some glib new gay-like names for them. Let’s define them, starting with gay, and include some of their "former" descriptions.

Gay: people being sexually attracted to people of their same sex (also called SSA, formerly called unnatural lust, wickedness, sexual disorder/addiction, homosexuality)

: people being sexually attracted to other people regardless of anybody's biological sex (formerly called unnatural lust, wickedness, sexual disorder/addiction, bisexuality, homosexuality)

: people insisting they are really supposed to be the opposite of their biological sex and then being sexually attracted to those of their same biological sex (formerly called mental illness, transvestite, transsexual, transgendered, homosexuality)

Fay: adults being sexually attracted to children/minors of either sex (formerly called unnatural lust, wickedness, dirty old men, pedophilia, pederasty, and/or homosexuality)

Pay: people being sexually attracted to sleazy, oversexed, extreme and perverse sexual material (formerly called sin, dirty mindedness, lust, sadism, more recently called pornography addiction)

Day: adults being sexually attracted to adults other than their spouse (formerly called sin of the heart, emotional affair, adulterous, betrayal, infidelity)

Ray: people being sexually attracted to children or young people who are their relatives (formerly called wickedness, sinfulness, dirty old men, incestuous, pedophilia, pederasty)

Say: people attracted to violent, masochistic forms of sexuality (formerly called iniquity, mental illness, sadism, sado-masochism)

May: people being sexually attracted to animals (formerly called iniquity, filthiness, bestiality)

And apparently there are even more "ays. " In addition, they often interconnect, such as pay linking to gay, day, fay, ray, or gay linking to fay, bay, say, etc. Like King Benjamin said, we cannot name them all.

We guess that most devout LDS who claim the gay/SSA identity and their sympathizers still believe most of the above "ays" are wrong in both thought and deed. And yet they invent sweeping allowances for homosexual attractions insisting that those afflicted have no control over them and can indulge in them emotionally, mentally, intellectually, and spiritually without harm to others or their own "worthiness."

We submit that if gay/SSA is okay as an identity that doesn't need, or can't, be fixed, why aren't all these other "ays" okay as permanent identities? Why aren't all these temptations equally harmless? Why don't all these other sexual attractions similarly cause no damage to afflicted people's character and worthiness? Unrepentant people who identify themselves as Gays, Bays, Trays, Fays, Pays, Days, Rays, Says, Mays---all are welcome to be teachers and leaders of the rest of us, including children and youth; why not? These attractions aren't harmful, that is, as long as they aren't "acted out." No big deal, right?

Of course not. It's safe to say that nobody in their right mind would knowingly allow proud, unrepentant, self-proclaimed fays, pays, rays, says, etc. to teach or lead others, even if they haven't acted out with their bodies. Their perverse sexual self-identification represents obsessive false ideas and wrong attitudes that spread as surely as a bodily disease spreads, especially among youth.

You see, giving in to this gay identity to any degree is not the answer. It's a dead end. There is excellent help available for those who truly desire to get straightened out---from the inside out.

As the miserable Pheadra who was lusting after her stepson said in Euripides's play Hyppolytus, "My hands are clean. It is my soul that's fouled."

And from Chaucer's The Canterbury Tales: "Oh foul sin of lust, observe your end! Not only would you weaken man's mind, but you wish completely to enslave his body. The end of your deeds or blind desires is lamentation. How many we see around us who, not for sometimes doing this sin but merely for the intention of doing it, are killed or ruined!" ("The Man of Law's Tale: Three," translation by R. M. Lumiansky, Simon and Schuster, 1948, 106.)

Here at SoL it's the rescue not just of bodies but of souls we care about.

Friday, April 22, 2011

Now is the Time to Be Valiant

The Lord needs valiant servants to do his work in the latter days . . . That's a line from a song in our church's children's songbook. Are we valiant servants?

When Satan is stirred up against that which is good, which he obviously is in our culture today, good people must be stirred up against that which is evil, as in being valiant. And yet what we see now is a lot of convenient silence.

We don't much stand or talk or preach against abortion anymore, even though unborn babies continue to be destroyed for no good reason. (There are seven abortion clinics in our state of Utah doing this evil work every day.) We don't dare mention traditional, natural gender roles, even though they are stated in our doctrine (The Family: A Proclamation to the World.) And we keep our mouths shut when it comes to homosexuality, even though it's wrong and harmful. All this because we've become conditioned, or we're afraid of offending somebody, or we think ourselves "enlightened."

The consequence of such behavior is obvious. When good men do nothing, evil triumphs. Of course we know that evil will triumph for a time. But in the eternal scheme of things, this doesn't matter. What will matter is if we were valiant servants of the Lord or not while we had the chance.

Chances to be valiant come often, in all kinds of ways. Parents, grandparents, teachers, leaders, citizens, public servants, all have opportunities to take an enthusiastic stand against these evils. Leaders especially seem to be in the hot seat because of their responsibility to make sure important and true (as opposed to false, vain, and foolish) principles are presented and followed. We are told that even those who are humble followers of Christ can go astray because their leaders teach them the precepts of men (2 Nephi 28).

It might be a good idea to think about what kind of person is the opposite of valiant. How about complacent, cowardly, afraid, shallow, hypocritical, selfish, blind, prideful, silly, ignorant, lazy?

Actually, the Lord doesn't need us at all. We're the ones who need him, his forgiveness, his redemption, and his Spirit to inspire and guide us, to make us valiant servants in our own stumbling way for the sake of our own eternal souls. Since none of us are perfect, it's safe to say we all have room for improvement.

Does anyone doubt that we will be judged according to how valiant we were in these crazy times?

Tuesday, March 1, 2011

Gay Love?

“How can anyone wish to deny a gay person love?” is a common question with a false premise. The fact is, no one is trying to deny anyone love. All are free to love whomever they want to. What God and traditional morality discourage is harmful out-of-bounds sexual lust and behavior.

The truth is, love is all around. And all kinds of love should be nonsexual, except one. In the one case when love does include sexuality, it should always be associated with mating, and therefore marriage. Two people of the same sex cannot mate, and therefore cannot marry in the true sense of the word.

This does not mean two people of the same sex cannot love. On the contrary, people of the same sex can share the greatest love and devotion. History and literature are filled with such love. (See the 196o film Spartacus for a great example in the scene when Spartacus proves his love for Antoninus.) As Jesus said, there is no greater love than a man laying down his life for a friend, which he himself exemplified in the highest degree. C. S. Lewis in The Four Loves pointed out that friendship is the purest, most selfless form of love in part because there is nothing like sexuality involved. (This is why spouses who are also best friends have the best of both worlds.)

Granted, a homosexual relationship between two people could begin with sincere and deep friendship. There is nothing so wonderful as two kindred spirits discovering each other, that they share interests and beliefs along with enjoying each other's company to the exclusion of everybody else. But the moment same-sex love becomes sexualized, it is corrupted and compromised. Whether our culture will admit it or not, homosexuality (which includes sodomy) is wrong and harmful. Anyone participating in it knows this in his heart of hearts. And true friends would never willingly bring any sort of harm upon each other.

When the above question is asked by gays or their supporters, the pure love of friendship is not even considered. Where today's gays are concerned, love must include sex, which is a dangerous idea; it would follow that all loving human relationships are essentially sexual. Of course a few wicked people already thought of this and there are some who believe this nonsense today.

But we believe that the average unthinking homosexualist (this includes both those who embrace it personally and those who accept it in others) is only a pawn. Such people have been fooled into equating sex and love. As such, the word love is used as a distraction from the real objective. Whether they realize it or not, what the above question really means is, “How can anyone wish to deny a person gay sex?” Simplest answer: Because it's harmful.

Monday, February 28, 2011

Gay Gays: A New Generation

We recently spoke to a pleasant young man who told us, “But I like being gay. It's fun! Even if it were possible to change, I wouldn’t want to."

What we are seeing is a generation growing up believing the gay hoax— that homosexuality is as normal and safe as heterosexuality. And as distasteful as it may sound to some of us, homosexuality in thought and deed is highly acceptable to many and actually desirable to a growing number.

Is finding out that gayness is enjoyable really a surprise in a sexually permissive culture that now treats homosexuality as a perfectly fine alternative? We see it in government, in entertainment, in news, in schoolbooks, classrooms, clubs, groups, and programs, in churches, and in everyday conversations and associations. Pro-gay organizations, gay youth groups, gay parades, gay pornography, chat rooms, and other internet forums encourage gayness. Young people who show the slightest interest are welcomed into these groups with open arms and quite easily recruited.

Yes, gay is in. It’s well into being one of the major fashions of the day. And fashions spread. In fact, we have it on the best authority that there are now young people who are admitting that they would not have feelings of same-sex sexual attraction if not for the suggestive, happy-go-lucky, gay-affirming culture they have grown up in. The hapless born-gay argument with its "why would anybody choose to be gay?" cry may no longer apply to the majority of gays in an environment that affirms gayness as hip and cool.

No, there is no gay gene, nor is any predisposition to gayness proven. But what about other environmental factors besides those mentioned above? What about sexual abuse? Overbearing mother? Emotionally absent or abusive father? Peer abuse? Unlucky with the opposite sex? These sad circumstances and many more can cause a young person to self-determine as gay. But times have changed.

All of us, including parents, ecclesiastical leaders, community and government leaders, teachers, scientists, and therapists, need to wake up to the state of our culture today, that homosexuality in the rising generation is now coming about solely through our benighted, bored, addictive, misguided, oversexed, licentious, extremely technological environment alone. In other words, mainstream society is training our young people in the carefree joys of homosexualism. After all, sins of all kinds have their pleasures. For a time.

Impure? Unholy?

We’ve heard from some that same-sex sexual attraction is only sinful when acted upon. Let’s think this through in a slightly different way.

Every active Mormon adult knows that light-mindedness is an impure and unholy practice and that we are to avoid all other such practices. From this we know that thoughts alone are practices.

Now, if certain ways of thinking, as in being light-minded, can be unacceptable practices, where would that put homosexual lust, that is, thinking sexually about a person of one’s own sex? Given that Mormons still believe homosexual behavior is sinful, isn’t thinking about homosexual behavior unacceptable, or impure and unholy, too? And here let's not be naive. We can safely assume that a person who confesses to what we now call same-sex attractedness or who adopts the gay label thinks about gay sex. Aren’t we to avoid such an impure and unholy practice?

If something is sinful when acted upon with our physical bodies, it is also sinful in the form of thoughts. In this light, same-sex sexual attraction, just like adulterous attraction, falls into the category of impure and unholy.

What we should be caring about most as Christian latter-day saints is the state of our souls and spiritual progress. If a person insists on the SSA or gay identity without resistance, we must assume the worst problem is within the soul, that it has embraced that which is impure and unholy.

The soul is where all sin proceeds from. It's also where the Lord comes in, where repentance can work, and where the mighty change of heart, the greatest miracle of all, can happen.

Pretending the above is not so only hinders truth , hurts people, and inhibits everyone's spiritual growth. Don't be fooled by the alternative sexual identity hoax.

Tuesday, February 22, 2011

School Thy Feelings, O My Brother

Somewhere along the societal road to enduring, pitying, and then embracing homosexuality, the idea that gay people have no control over their sexual feelings has emerged as universal and incontestable. There are basic problems with this sweeping generalization. At the outset it presumes gay people are not responsible human beings, but more like babies or robots or slaves. Then the question arises, wherever these feelings originated, isn’t there a point when every individual does begin to call up, nurture, and increase, that is, choose them? And this truth is overlooked: Pretending people do not choose what they think, feel, and do fuels a victim mentality, shifts responsibility, and hinders change, health, and personal progress.

Viktor Frankl in his famous book, Man's Search for Meaning, shared in a dramatic way the discovery that he had the freedom to choose and direct his thoughts and feelings even while seized, separated from his family, imprisoned, and grossly abused in a Nazi concentration camp. All of us have this power, even those who have been traumatized and abused. In the face of abuse we must not argue for weakness or illness. Weak and ill people can and should become strong and well. Conscious choices, such as the decision to face the problem and get help if necessary can set a person free.

But we mostly think of healthy people when we think of gayness these days. If this is so, gays are just like everybody else in that they can reason and choose what to do with their feelings, minds, and bodies. Sexual feelings are no exception. These feelings, like all others, can be indulged in a number of ways. Or they can be ignored, distracted, or redirected. If this principle were not true, we would live in a state of anarchy, as if we all remained toddlers in the terrible twos.

People in all stages of maturing make judgments and put breaks on their feelings continually. We decide what to entertain in our minds and what to reject. Thinkers through the ages from Plato to Thoreau have expounded on the importance of choosing to fill our minds with good and right thoughts which connect to corresponding feelings and conduct. They warn that children must be taught proper attitudes and feelings.

As Frankl pointed out, each of us is endowed with free will, beginning with our innermost thoughts and feelings. We believe this personal agency is a gift from God essential to our progress. It includes the freedom to choose our sexual thoughts and feelings. Our church has a hymn called "School Thy Feelings," interestingly designated as for a Men's Choir. This implies that feelings of all kinds can be taught, learned, chosen, guided, controlled, and changed for the better.

Yes, contrary to popular opinion, gays have control over their feelings. They have control over their thoughts. They have control over their conduct. And they are accountable for all of it, just like everybody else.

School thy feelings, O my brother;
Train thy warm, impulsive soul.
Do not its emotions smother,
But let wisdom's voice control.

#336 LDS Hymnbook

Monday, January 24, 2011

Why Gay Couples Can Never Be Good, Better, or Best Parents

(Note: In this post we are referring only to open, proud gays, not those who are resisting and privately working to overcome homosexuality.)

We've heard it from the media. We've heard it from our kids' friends. Now we've heard it from members of our church. "I know some lesbians who are such good parents." "At least it's better than abusive heterosexual parents or no parents at all." "Some of the best parents I know are gay."

First of all, how do they know? Are they the child of gay parents? Are they being raised by them? Do they live with them? Are they an innocent captive child audience to homosexual behaviors? Sure, the child may be fed, dressed, and housed, taught to wash hands and brush teeth and say the alphabet, get plenty of hugs and kisses and toys. But what else are they getting? They are getting a firsthand education in selfishness and delusion, not to mention a perverse sex education.

Here is a reality check:

1. Children do best in every way when raised by both a mother and a father because male and female complement each other, that is, they each add something uniquely essential. Gay couples are the same sex and therefore do not complement each other in important ways. Their union does not contribute anything of lasting value to a child.

2. Gay couples cannot mate. They do not do and never can do the thing that can make babies, although they do their best to contrive the heterosexual act. That's why they shouldn't be portrayed as if they are married. Societies sanction marriage (that is, two people of opposite sex forming a union with the understanding that they will do the thing that can make babies, whether they get babies or not) with the best interests and security of children in mind. Since homosexuals and lesbians can never make offspring together, their relationships do not deserve to be legitimized as marriage or anything like it. Same-sex sexual relationships are totally disconnected from human reproduction. As such, in every aspect, this fact must consciously or unconsciously define and influence their so-called union, including the lesser degree overall that children are important to them.

3. The "I deserve to be a parent no matter what" thing was cemented with Murphy Brown, the TV show that in a 1992 episode should have shocked America when the main character, a single working woman got pregnant and decided to celebrate being a single mother. Once we accepted elective single unwed parenting, elective gay parenting was next; if kids could do just as well without a dad or a mom, wouldn't two dads or two moms be even better? No. See #1.

4. Gay couples who finagle a way to procure a child are thinking primarily of themselves, as if a human infant is a pet, a trophy, or a sign of personal fulfillment. The fact that they must contrive an unnatural way--no exceptions--to obtain children portrays homosexuality's maladaptiveness. They do not care that they, personally, are purposefully and willfully depriving a child of normalcy and security in order to satisfy their own desires or whims. It's a case of wanting to have their cake and eat it.
5. Gay couples are 2-6X more likely to include instability, drug abuse, domestic violence, promiscuity, and the like, than heterosexual married parents.

6. The scope of legal ramifications of gay parenthood are a nightmare. As always, it is the children who suffer most when parents go wrong, and gay relationships open up a whole new set of unimaginable problems when children are involved.

7. Gay parents are modeling and teaching in unspoken and probably spoken ways a perverted and often extreme and promiscuous view of human sexuality. Before accepting the idea that gays make good parents, everyone should read Out From Under, by Dawn Stefanowicz, a heart-wrenching personal narrative on being raised by a gay father. Dawn is active in helping many others who have had similar experiences work through the damage done.In many ways, the social experiment called gay parenting, which is centered on the whims of sexually radical adults rather than the best interests of children, should be considered child sexual abuse. Common sense indicates that in such situations children are being exposed to a model of maladaptive and risky gender role play, sexuality, and behavior as if all is normal and safe. *As if we need more than common sense, scientific evidence is emerging indicating all sorts of negative outcomes including sexual. According to a pioneering new study by researcher Mark Regnerus, children of gay parents experience dramatically higher rates of depression, unemployment, drug use, arrests, marital problems, and, not surprisingly, sexual abuse, confusion,and promiscuity. One example of the dangers to children caught in this lifestyle is the finding that "children of lesbian mothers are an astonishing 11 times more likely to have been 'touched sexually by a parent or other adult caregiver' in childhood (but not necessarily by the homosexual parent; IBF 2%; LM 23%), and are nearly 4 times as likely to have been 'physically forced' to have sex against their will (at some time in their life, not necessarily in childhood; IBF 8%; LM 31%)."

We suggest people think about the best and long-term interests of innocent children and review what it is gay people actually model to their children and do with each other before sympathizing with,defending, and praising the modern travesty now called gay parenting.

*Added 10/14