Monday, April 29, 2019

Gay BYU Valedictorian Proudly Comes Out to Great Applause

When has a person's personal, private sexual attractions and desires, normal or perverse, ever been part of his or her college valedictorian speech at BYU? Never. Until now. On April 26, 2019, the valedictorian of the political science department/school of family, home, and social sciences ---the most liberal, leftist college in the university---was chosen to deliver the address in the Marriot Center, which address was reviewed and signed off in advance, and which included these remarks:

"I stand before my family, friends, and graduating class today to say that I am proud to be a gay son of God. I am not broken. I am loved and important to the plan of our great creator.  Each of us are." [Smiled and paused waiting for applause and cheering and whistling to die down.] "Four years ago it would have been impossible for me to imagine that I would come out to my entire college. It is a phenomenal feeling. And it is a victory in and of itself."  In an interview with the Washington Post he expresses the hope that "my country, my faith, and my community will follow in a similar fashion," which is to "be different or not fit the norm." 

A victory? Over what or whom? All we can think of is God. He is declaring a victory over God.  Which includes victory over decency, health, truth, wholesomeness, righteousness, biology, law, goodness, justice, reality, and Christ. There is nothing pure here. Congratulations.

The norm? Does he mean the norm as in the birds and the bees? Because if his country, faith, and community decides to reject normal human sexuality, we won't have any more country, faith, or community. There is nothing even human here. Again, congratulations.

Why would anybody in their mind want to applaud for such a victory, or such a thumbing one's nose at normalcy, as in reality and emotional and mental health? Why does such a person deserve any credit for simply going along with the popular trends of the wicked times we're living in, which trends are actually as old as mankind? Why does he deserve praise and applause for identifying himself with his current lusts? These lusts have no doubt been suggested by oversexed environmental influences, fueled by same sex internet pornography, encouraged by gay chat rooms, inflamed by masturbation, exacerbated by self-absorption and entitlement, cemented by secret sexual communications and meetings with older men, emboldened and informed by homosex activists and recruiters, and supported by family, friends, teachers, school, and now church.

This narcissism, ignorance, and reckless youthful presumption is the result of higher education? Was he even introduced to any timeless wisdom and knowledge with that university 4.0? Sounds like he just got indoctrinated and emboldened and became a sex activist, which is happening at almost every college and university in America today. Many kids are entering college straight and coming home gay and/or homosexualist. Is anybody making the connection? Of course this indoctrinated young man will enter the field of public discourse with his political science/writing degree. This is the type of occupation they all end up doing. As he said, he gained confidence to open up to his parents, as well as friends, by counseling with faculty advisors who supported him emotionally as well as academically. What does a person's sexuality have to do with a college education? Did some of those faculty advisors also initiate him in homosex? That's how it happens. Older men initiate younger men in secret.

Why should we applaud homsexualism when, relatively speaking, just five seconds ago it was universally abhorred? Why should we applaud homosexualism when it has proved to be inordinately and outrageously promiscuous, risky, even deadly? Why should we applaud homosexualism when the scriptures plainly condemn it? Why are we suddenly supposed to love, encourage, and celebrate this formerly unspeakable identity and lifestyle? We know why. It's because these "progressives" love the world more than God. They love themselves/human beings (code word: authenticity, or the natural man) more than God. They love their own or others' lusts more than God. They think they are smarter than God. They have made a false god over in their own image that fits their worldview and their current passions. 

There is nothing new or mysterious or enlightened about how these increasingly worldly Mormon people have jumped on the sexual liberation band wagon. They are just following along with the very wicked old world, and fooling themselves into thinking they are more righteous than anybody who ever lived, including God. Please note that there is no sin, no law, no punishment, no repentance, and no Christ in this gay-is-great worldview. And when we get hate mail about this post, none of these haters will deny any of our points. They will only attack us personally.

Interesting that this momentous event was not reported in the Church-owned Deseret News or KSL-TV and radio.  There will only be more and more of these glorified comings-out in church venues of all descriptions, which will apparently be pretty much winked at/ignored by the administration.

When did anybody ever whistle and cheer and applaud for a young man who inappropriately and proudly announces to a captive audience of 10,000 people that he is a heterosexual, God's straight son? Maybe, science fiction-like, that will happen at some future time when all of this nonsense has played out, humankind is dying out for this and other reasons, and such courageous young men are its only hope.

Many are hoping the Lord will come soon.

Note 5/5/2019: We have since heard that this individual has been "out" for some time, in case you had the idea this was news, and has a same-sex partner or two. In other words, he is an experienced homosexual. Correct us if we heard wrong.

Sunday, April 14, 2019

Straight and Gay Equality in the Church: What This Looks Like

Lots of developments have taken place lately among the flock. Shepherds have reversed their roles. Wolves have entered in. The unrepentant are numbered among the repentant; names are no longer to be blotted out. Evil is being called good. Good is being called evil. (Apparently the worst thing anyone can do these days is call out the worst things people are doing.) The hideous abortion culture and all the LGBTQ social travesties are left unaddressed. All that matters is being nice and loving everybody. (And when did we not be nice and love everybody?) Most people are acting like the three silly monkeys with their eyes, ears, and mouths covered. The worst and most absurd and lustful imaginings of men are being ignored, indulged, encouraged, celebrated. Humble people and troubled families are being left on their own to try to make sense of these crazy things. God's eternal truths are being treated as changeable, transient, dependent upon the fashionable, noisy wickedness of the times. Our people are committing atrocities.

Yes, atrocities. Men are abandoning their holy promises, their wives and children, for hedonistic same-sex sex. Family members are being forced to join in celebrating same-sex weddings or be ostracized by their loved ones. A returned missionary turns to male gay prostitution and contracts AIDS. Wouldn't you call a young woman voluntarily having healthy parts of her body cut off so she can more easily pretend to be a male an atrocity? Her grieving Mormon mother sure does. It sounds positively medieval. Voltaire said, "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."

Here's a little atrocity we experienced ourselves the other day. We were innocently driving down a local street when suddenly a vehicle pulled up alongside us out of nowhere, the driver seeming to shout angrily at us. He pointed and waved a large middle finger at us violently. At the same time his car swerved threateningly into our lane toward ours. What was this road rage about? Fearing for our safety we quickly turned onto the first available side road and lost him. All we can figure out is that this bearded thirty-something man in a van was angry at our conservative bumper stickers, most probably the little 2-inch rainbow circle with a line through it. We reported this incident to the police. Bumper stickers are legal, whereas using one's car to threaten people is against the law. And you know, we've seen plenty of bumper stickers we don't like or agree with, but it has never occurred to us to treat any such car or driver in any inconsiderate, much less vulgar, dangerous, or violent manner. So where is the hate really coming from? And where is the kindness?

One result of these above recent developments is that lately we have seen many confused, frustrated, and sad faces, full of pain and suffering. And we have seen some of these same people starting to wake up, starting to think for themselves, starting to let go of their trust in human beings, and turn to God. After all, the scriptures say we are cursed if we put our trust in men, cursed as in stagnated,  deceived, harmed, even led to hell, perhaps. Therefore, shifting our religious responsibilities to ourselves and the Lord is one very good thing that is happening. We in the trenches must engage our God-given intellects, seeking the Spirit to discern truth and error and guide our families. 

One troubling development that has occurred in our church is that homosexual and heterosexual immoral acts will now be treated exactly the same. Sure, we get it. The gays are all about equality, as per their bumper stickers. Clever. And now they have it. The problem is that homosexuality is always bad and wrong and unhealthy and unnatural, and heterosexuality is very good and right and healthy and natural in one particular setting--proper relations between faithful man and woman in marriage. So we must point out that in treating homo and hetero immorality exactly the same, that is, what---punishing child abuse, rape, premarital sex, and adultery?---it follows that what is acceptable for straights will now also be acceptable for gays. If equality is the primary principle, how can we not see that many homosexual behaviors will now be acceptable?

Yes, while equal treatment may forbid some behaviors for both straights and gays, it also allows every gay behavior except those sinful for straights. In other words, equality demands that things that are not sinful among straights can no longer be treated as sinful among gays. Think about it. In this supposed Christ-centered, morality-based church, gay members can, with impunity, indulge and practice same-sex romantic fantasies. (Apparently nobody cares much these days about sexual purity in the heart, mind, or soul, even though we are told that no unclean thing can dwell in God's presence.) In addition, gays can now flirt, dance, hold hands, hug, date, go steady, court, show affection publicly, get engaged, and yes, get married and have a family (in their case only through artificial means). None of these acts are immoral for heterosexuals, so evidently they won't be treated as immoral for homosexuals. In one blink, gay coupling just became allowed in the Mormon church.

Yes, the official pronouncements are very difficult to decipher, but if you can, they indeed appear to compromise the Family Proclamation and reverse a revelation that was given just a few years ago. (Isn't it line upon line, not line upon redacted line?) Gay coupling, including gay marriage, is now acceptable in a church that only 11 years ago headed a huge campaign for California's prop 8, which was against legalizing gay marriage. Many people have not left their church, but quite suddenly their church has certainly left them.

How is this possible, you ask? As far as we can make out, from what we have heard here and there, Mormons use the following line of reasoning in order to justify these developments. Get ready. We are not making this up.The thing that is still what they call "a serious transgression" (not necessarily requiring any church discipline, left to local authorities) is just the actual ceremony of same-sex marriage. Not sex acts like sodomy, etc. Now this is the reason why and it might stun you. Powers that be and many members actually believe, or reason, or pretend, or wish, or are convinced that Mormon gays do not act out. We have actually heard this perception expressed verbally by specific individuals in positions of authority. Let that sink in.

Of course "acting out" is not defined. Aren't all of the behaviors listed above homosexual acts? Oh well, let's say what they mean is that they are confident their very special and precious same-sex attracted church members, family members, and friends are and will forever remain celibate, which means they have not, do not, and will not have full-on same-sex sexual relations, but instead act like, well, close friends. Apparently even when they are married!

News flash. Married people sleep together. They have sexual relations. Marriage is actually the only relationship that is supposed to be sexualized. Of course the institution of marriage has been hijacked and held hostage by the LGBT juggernaut. Activists don't really care at all about gays being "married;" they just hate God and want sex to be for any and everyone, which negates the whole idea of marriage as the only place where sex is supposed to happen. They want to bring the whole house down, as Midge Decter put it. And now same-sex people can get married, and recognized as such, in the Mormon church no less. So there you go. Do people really think that open homosexuals, who insist this is how God made them, who are all about complete equality with heterosexuals, are going to refrain from sex, at least in the only way they can ever, sort of, do it?

Come now. Is there any reason to assume that unrepentant same-sex attracted couples, now accepted, are not going to play out their romantic and sexual feelings? With their public sexualized "identity" and in this hedonistic, pornogrified, eroticized environment that tells them with the touch a fingertip that whatever feels good is right? Is there any evidence? Do we know if any such couples exist? If so, might they be the exception? Is there anything wise or realistic or even honest or kind about this fantastic celibacy idea? Can we seriously accept people for "who they are" and then not allow them to live that way? No, and so now we are allowing them to live that way, aren't we?---just by pretending that they aren't living that way.

About this conundrum one octogenarian said, "Well, their leaders will just ask them if they are doing it, like they ask everybody else about sexual immorality." Really? Ask married people if they are having sex? Who does that to heterosexuals? Nobody, so they can't ask homosexuals. Equality, remember? And even if they were asked, the gay narrative is that lying about it is perfectly fine, if it furthers the cause.

A middle-aged man approached us at a conference this past week. He seemed stunned, in a sort of daze as if faced with something absolutely unbelievable. He said he knew a wonderful young man with so much promise, a young gay Mormon, a favorite, whom everybody trusted could and would live a celibate life. The man looked off in the distance and said, "I just can't believe it. He is living that terrible lifestyle now. And he was such a good boy . . ."

Do people really think we don't reap what we sow?

Do people really think that those emboldened enough and experienced enough and rebellious enough to publicly come out as gay are not involved in pornography and have not experimented and are not acting on it and never will? When such shenanigans are approved of by society and government? Are people really this naive? Or is this gullibility a put-on for convenience-sake, a loophole so as not to have to single out for anything negative the protected LGBTQ crowd? (And let's not forget that many Mormons today---yes, maybe the ones sitting next to you in church---are perfectly fine with people having gay sex. They can't for the life of them figure out why our leaders don't just let people "love"---read: sex around with---whomever they want! Hello? Nobody is stopping anybody from purely and truly loving anybody.)

Make of that presumption---that Mormon gays are purity itself---what you will. With no satisfactory explanations, everyone is doing just that, making of all of this what they will. As for us at SoL, we repeat. Homosexuality is being portrayed in both mainstream and now in most all churches as normal and wholesome, modeled and taught to children. It is in the air young people breathe today. It is pornographic in nature. It is highly alluring, highly sexual, highly addictive, and highly promiscuous. It is gravely risky and harmful. It is rebellious against nature and God. It is anti-Christ and anti-posterity. It is a miserable dead end, physically, mentally, emotionally, and spiritually.


Sexual perversion knows no bounds and no end. Whatever vile things mankind can imagine, it will do. Still, mere sins of the flesh are not the worst sins. For instance, willfully denying and rebelling against God, against goodness and truth, is far worse. But there is hope for all types of sinners.  Through Jesus Christ individuals can humble down and admit their sins, turn away from them, repent, and become new beings with changed desires, washed clean and free, loving God first. Strange, within the last decade or so this merciful and glorious gospel solution has no longer been emphasized or even offered in any way regarding same-sex attraction in any official church capacity, not in our church, just like many others. Sin and repentance and redemption are not included in the gay Mormon narrative at all.

Perhaps the last step (we say last step advisedly) in this long tale of woe is people of the same sex getting married in the Mormon temples. You think not?  What about equality? They have been after this very thing for decades. We remember full-page gay-affirming ads in the papers something like 15 years ago showing two men posing in front of the Salt Lake Temple. They will not stop pressuring the church until this is accomplished. And isn't the groundwork laid? If the required line is that Mormon same-sex couples don't actually do the unspeakable, why can't they be officially joined together now and forever? What about gay-parented families? Why can't the children a same-sex couple procures be sealed to them? The gay family group sheets are already prepared.

Say what leaders will, it is our understanding that just this past week the road was cleared of any obstacles for open gay coupling in the Mormon church and gay temple ceremonies. Not to mention gay teachers and leaders on every level. All celibate of course! (This kind of thing is done in private after all, any ultimately fatal or chronic health problems and illnesses are pretty private, too, and no babies ever come of it, so who would know?) As always, we would love to be corrected if we're wrong.

After that, there will be more atrocities to come, yet unimagined by decent people. We haven't even scratched the surface of the transgender insanity being force-fed to us and all that will mean.

People ask us if we are keeping the faith. We say, faith in what? Because our faith in God, in Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit teaching us the truth of all things grows every day. 

Note: Many Mormons we hear from on these topics have shared that they are greatly comforted and strengthened by the timeless truths referred to on our website and in our books Captain of My Soul, Chased by an Elephant, and Me Tarzan, You Jane. Use the text of Me Tarzan, You Jane for free here. There appear to be very few resources of this kind for Mormons available. Homosexuality, what causes it, the harm and heartbreak it results in, and the possibility of repentance and healing specific to this particular sin are no longer addressed in mainstream Mormonism.

Monday, February 25, 2019

NO GETTING STRAIGHTENED OUT ALLOWED

Let's think through this ban on gay conversion therapy for anyone under 18 that is now the law in 14 states, soon to be 15 or 16, as in Utah and Colorado. Yes, Utah. A formerly highly conservative state that has now almost completely recharacterized itself to all-out liberal. Even far left.

If things go as planned, it will soon be against the law for, say, parents to get their teenager professional help in overcoming unwanted homosexuality. In Utah. This is the place, folks. It's the place where we found brilliant help for our son all those years ago, our son, who voluntarily rooted out and conquered his unwanted problem and later got married to a lovely woman, our son who is now the father of three lovely children. This is the place that is now about to outlaw that sort of help, with the whole-hearted imprimatur of the dominant church. Yes, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints has denounced reparative therapy, at the same time refusing to accept gay marriage. Try figuring that one out.

The church did not technically support the bill, but rather announced publicly it would not oppose it, which is tantamount to supporting it. In reading the bill it appears that the church is satisfied with protecting itself legally because of a clause in the bill that gives exemption to ecclesiastical members or counselors in a religious capacity saying anything that might be construed as converting someone from gay to straight.(In our church these are most likely to be lay people who have no training in giving any such help anyway. And apparently, according to material the church has produced welcoming gayness, gospel principles such as sin and repentance through Christ are not to be considered. All the counseling anyone will get on this topic is maybe abstinence and warning of the gay lifestyle, the likes of which we don't hear over the pulpit.) Any additional concrete reason the church has refused to support professional sexual orientation change therapy are not common knowledge. The best members can do is make unfounded second-guesses and conjectures to try to excuse this travesty. The position the church has taken concerning this type of therapy is certainly politically correct.

Granted, in the 1960s and early 70s, Mormons with homosexual tendencies were convinced to submit themselves to shock treatments and other crazy procedures in the hope of ridding themselves of the lust for homosexual sex, that is, lust for sodomy. That was stupid. Look, sodomy and all that goes with it is an age-old sin. Key word: sin. It doesn't seem right or effective to try to use electricity to shock somebody out of sinfulness.That is not how Christianity is supposed to be conducted.

After all, the scriptures say that it's the gospel that works better than anything else in overcoming sin. Indeed, the gospel of Jesus Christ was the foundation of our son's therapy, as in we are human beings who go astray, and because of Jesus Christ we can retrace our steps, get on the right path through truth, and repentance and faith in Him, and become humble new creatures with new hearts and new desires fit for the presence of God. (Correct us if that is not the pure gospel of Jesus Christ in a nutshell. You either believe in it or you don't.)

In this oversexed world that celebrates homosexuality like the newest fad, supposed followers of Christ, as in leaders of The Church of Jesus Christ, are against counseling to help young people figure out and overcome and repent of this lawless trendy lust? Really? People, that's just anti-Christ. A heads up for you Mormons: all the anti-Christs in the Book of Mormon were intent on abolishing the whole idea of repentance.

Besides being anti-Christ, another frightening thing about this development is its assault on liberty (which is related to Christianity because we have to be free to live it). Who do these gay activists think they are, going around conniving to make it illegal to act according to the dictates of one's own conscience in their personal life by seeking out counseling that supports their worldview? And why would any church go along with such a thing? A church supporting a bill that outlaws people living their lives according their religious beliefs? Like one of our kids said, it's like outlawing religion. Why would a church want to do that?

This bill is nothing short of tyranny. As per Thomas Jefferson, "I have sworn on the altar of God eternal hostility against any form of tyranny over the mind of man." We're talking about tyranny over children, young people, families, people's private lives and consciences.

We must also bear firmly in mind where all this is coming from, ergo, the spirit of the times. Traditional moral values are being flushed down the toilet. We are living in enemy territory, in an excessively sexual environment where porn (including same-sex porn) is ubiquitous and where normal sexual development and proper sexual feelings are commonly interfered with, inflamed, and distorted. We're seeing the emasculization of manhood and the masculization of womanhood. Perverse and unnatural sexuality in any form people can imagine is paraded in the streets and touted as heroic. People can even decide which sex they really want to be despite their obvious anatomy, or even make up some new sex that can change with the wind. Oh, except from gay to straight. That's the only change increasingly not allowed societally, and now even legally.

The truth is, the Godless gay juggernaut doesn't want anybody to find out how they got into homosexuality or how they can get out. They don't want anybody to question homosexualism (as in both homosexual tendencies and homosexual acts), even if it is unwanted, even if it does violence to the person's conscience, even if they change their minds and want out, even though it is very hazardous, even though it is abominable to God, even though it is a mockery of the procreative act and an abuse of humanity. No, apparently these activists are so miserable themselves that they don't want anybody else getting help out of their dead-end misery either.

Gay activists and their supporters, their sympathizers, and those who for their own reasons are suddenly fine with this "identity," (read: homosexual lust and behavior), have acted so as to show that they don't want anybody to be able to understand these dangerous and perverse feelings, or root them out, or live a normal fulfilling life. This isn't love, it isn't compassion. It's ignorant, self-serving, cunning, deceptive, fawning, cruel, tyrannical, or all of those and more.

As Euripides wrote, "What brashness has the human heart! How far will it push?"

Note 2/26/19 We will let you know here if this Utah bill passes. It is in the rules committee now. We bet it will, simply because the dominant church is not opposing it.

Note 3/9/19  Surprise! The bill failed in committee because a new version was introduced (by our friends and our son's counselor all those years ago) and the sponsor of the bill did not like it and did not appear, which automatically tables the bill. The new version banned physical therapies such as shock and aversion (which haven't been done for decades anyway), but allowed talk therapy, and the bill's author wouldn't go for even that! Anyway, parents and young people with unwanted homosexual tendencies can still get the kind of counseling they desire in Utah for another year.  

Sunday, February 3, 2019

A Person's a Person No Matter How Small

--Janice Graham

We've been listening  some reactions to New York's evil abortion law and Virginia's attempt to pass the same sort of thing. It appears that even those who are generally pro-abortion are cringing at it. After all, they say, it's obviously a baby at the time of birth. So, yes full term abortion would be murder. But not say, during the first trimester. Let's take this supposed logic apart.

First, we never hear anybody talk about how the woman chose to have sexual intercourse in the first place. This is the case in the great majority of abortions. (Pregnancies aborted because of the health of the mother, rape, and incest are very rare indeed. More on that later.) Yes, sexual intercourse is most often a choice for both men and women. Sexual intercourse is the one choice that makes babies. Making a baby can be a result of sexual intercourse. Both the male and the female old enough to have sex know this fact from the start, and yes, it's the female, not the man, who is physically affected by pregnancy, which is just the way life is. If she, or they, makes the choice to stop the baby's life, that is her or their second choice. Yes, the pro-choice movement should more accurately be called pro-second-choice. And people assume it's the woman's choice alone to abort. But if the father is involved in the decision to abort, he knows, too, that this is a second choice he is making. The first was to engage in sexual relations, you know, that thing that makes babies.

Notice how no one talks about that first choice. They just fly off the handle saying how unfair it is that a woman should have to carry and give birth to a baby if or when she doesn't want to. We have even heard pregnancy/motherhood called a form of slavery. Really? The pregnancy? News flash. In the great majority of cases, the baby grows automatically in the protected safety of the mother's womb. She  really doesn't have to do anything extra or different to make the baby grow. There is the possibility of morning sickness, which can be all sorts of bad, and it might get uncomfortable toward the end, but that doesn't sound like slavery. After all, the woman chose to do the thing that made the baby. We are not talking about rape-induced pregnancy (very rare), so nobody forced her. So no, that is not even anything like slavery. It's just a fact of life that she knew from the start. Are they talking about motherhood? Is motherhood slavery? Again, no, because the woman chose to do the thing that made her a mother. And if she doesn't want to be a mother, there are countless infertile couples dying to have a family. She can give the baby away to some extremely grateful couple of her choice and walk away free as a bird. That doesn't sound like slavery either.

Granted, pregnancy and birth may be inconvenient, scary, even painful. I carried and gave birth to seven children, including a pair of 7 pound twins, some quite easily, some with difficulty. But this is what life is.  On the one side it can be inconvenient, scary, even painful. There is no way around that in some form or other. All of us came to be on this earth under those very same conditions. Hopefully the woman who finds herself inconveniently, scarily, even painfully pregnant learns a lesson or two, one of which is that sex is serious. If you choose to participate in it, there are all sorts of consequences. One of them is that you might get pregnant and have a baby, whether you want to or planned to at the time or not.This is a biological fact about the physically matured human female.


Second, people talk about some "gray area" in the course of human life between when a human has no value and when that human suddenly has great value The fact that people cannot pinpoint this moment in time, and admit that they cannot, is highly problematic. That judgment becomes an arbitrary one, subject to all sorts of whims and conditions, including the state or country you live in. Thus, the whole human race is tossed to and fro. That's because that supposed gray area between non-human and human is not only arbitrarily decided by anyone who happens to be in charge, but imaginary.Yes, a human being begins at conception, or as Dr. Seuss put it, "a person's a person no matter how small."

Now, as to the very rare cases of pregnancies that come about by rape or incest, at first glance in
these days when abortion is commonplace, this may appear the thing to do. We might especially worry about the pregnant female being a minor. After all, rape victimizes an innocent female. It's a horrible crime that greatly affects her life and it's not her fault she got pregnant. But it's not the new human's fault either. Perhaps it is best to let nature take its course, seeing as how abortion is yet another violent act against humanity. Pregnancy and birth are natural, whereas abortion is not. Such a  female, pregnant by an act of rape, who has an abortion may someday regret it because abortion is also an act of violence---to the death---against an innocent being, while the one who gives the child a life has just let nature take its course and need never regret it. As for incest the same logic applies. Any human life that results from these situations is not at fault and is valuable nonetheless.Same with a baby with defects. Human life is human life, and valuable in all its conditions. If we stray from this ideal, anything can take its place. Anyone can be deemed unnecessary or burdensome.

Life is complex. Life can get messy. But whether people like it or not, life is irrefutably life, amazing, inexplicable, and of immeasurable value. Abortion is the most blatant example of what happens when the current human powers that be decide to mock and defy the gift of procreation, step by step, until we cannot deny that at any stage needless abortion is an egregious self-loathing act of man's inhumanity to man and rebellion against God and Creation.

Saturday, January 26, 2019

The Nation's Baby Killers

-Janice Graham

The powers that be, their sycophants and supporters, in the state of New York are celebrating. Their applause filled the legislative chamber. They lit up their monuments, including the World Trade Center, in honor of the legalization of . . . wait for it . . . abortion up to the very second of a baby's full-term birth. There is no longer any restriction on when an abortion can be done.

Yes, in the state of New York a baby can legally be destroyed in all those inhuman ways we've heard of, ---murdered---anytime, even just before signs indicate he or she is about to be born naturally. Incredibly, at full term, the adoption option isn't even part of the conversation.

Here is some history. As far as we have been able to learn, at the time of Roe v. Wade, when abortion was first legalized, it was only allowed in the first trimester. In 1992 the Supreme Court extended it to the end of the second trimester. Then, states began to nibble away even at that. But the very controversial idea of partial birth abortion, when birth is induced and the baby is brutally killed before it completely exists the birth canal, has been and is still forbidden.

We do not know how killing a full term infant is to be legally accomplished. There is certainly no humane way to kill a baby. We heard someone say the child is poisoned and then the mother waits a few days, after which the dead baby is taken or delivered. Doesn't that sound so much more dangerous for the mother than letting the baby be born alive and healthy?  Also, the part of the New York law, which used to require a second doctor on hand to save the child's life if the abortion didn't work, is now repealed. Isn't that horrible? Many are assuming this means it is now pretty much legal to either let die or even purposely kill an infant that survives abortion. To know what this might look like we need only open our eyes to what that butcher Gosnell was convicted of doing to living, post-birth infants in Pennsylvania. Have you seen the movie, Gosnell: The Trial of America's Biggest Serial Killer, documenting his crimes? He was put in jail forever, but thanks to New York is now probably busy preparing his appeal.

This brutality can be done legally for any reason. Or none. Not only that, but non-doctors, that's health care "practitioners" who acquire some sort of state certification or authorization (however that is decided), are now permitted to perform abortions legally. Also, a full-term infant (40 weeks) still inside the womb, who is the victim of a homicide will no longer be considered a valuable human life cut short by crime as before (at least after 24 weeks gestation), but completely ignored by the law. And guess what else? This sets a precedent for the entire country to follow, a country that is continually showing in more and more ways how much it despises its own posterity, through its celebratory destruction of innocent humanity, through its casual and perverse and financial exploitation of human sexuality, through the increasing sexualization and endangerment of innocent children, and through the mockery and misconstruction of the two sexes and the procreative act. 

FYI, in New York City, about one in every three pregnancies is ended by abortion. It has one of the highest rates of abortion in the country.

What a bunch of liars and hypocrites these New Yorkers are. They pretend it's all about the health of the mother. Not so. For one example, it's a fact that after 15 weeks gestation it is safer for the mother to carry the baby to term and give birth normally than to have an abortion. They pretend it's about the mother's mental or emotional health, but  would-be mothers are now coming forward testifying of the lasting trauma and regret they experience from having an abortion.

Let's get real. These pro-abortion zealots know that abortion was first legalized, albeit very stealthily, with the imprimatur that it would be rare and safe, that it would only occur when really necessary (however that was to be defined; these days it is hardly ever really necessary), that it would only be allowed in the first trimester, and that only trained medical doctors would perform it. It was drilled into everyone's head that this would end dangerous and seedy back-alley abortions and so improve the health and lives of women. What a slippery slope it has all turned out to be! Not that we ever thought abortion on demand was ever right. We believe human beings in every stage are endowed with certain inalienable rights.

Honestly, everybody knows that sexual intercourse between normal reproductive-age opposite sex couples may result in the creation of  a human embryo. Every decent and responsible person knows that when such people engage in male-female intercourse, they may make a baby. So nothing about abortion is about a woman having freedom over her own body. She has that when she engages in sex all right, but when conception occurs things change. Suddenly there is another unique human life involved, whom, if you merely leave alone up until the time of birth, will most likely be born healthy, be taken care of, and grow to adulthood and old age.

How our standards and morals have changed! There is a 1932 movie called Life Begins, starring Loretta Young. At the time it was made it was banned in some places because it was considered too raw or sensitive for public consumption. It's about several women in a maternity ward of a hospital awaiting the birth of their babies, all with different points of view about the impending event. Young's character is an inmate of the local prison (unfairly convicted of murder to life in prison) whose husband adores her, but who at the last moment must decide who to save, the mother or the baby. The father chooses his wife, but the doctors secretly let the condemned mother decide. She chooses the baby. Another woman, a showgirl, and married, feels no sense of motherhood, and wants to give her baby (it turns out to be twins) away. Another is joyfully adding to an already large family. Another is approaching motherhood in a purely scientific way, planning to have no human attachment with her infant. Still another's baby is destined not to survive birth. Each end up dealing with their own and others' birth situations in a natural and motherly way.  Surprisingly for some, these mothers quite quickly soften and grow to appreciate the miracle of birth and cherish their babies. The hard, unfeeling women change into caring, nuturing, unselfish mothers. How sad that so many women today aren't even giving themselves that chance! Interesting how none of these outcomes in the film end in killing a baby, needlessly or otherwise. I imagine that in those days abortion was just too unthinkable and unspeakable to portray in a movie. Yes, our standards and morals have greatly changed---to our own great shame---and people need to know it.

Now we see that, even for no reason at all, pregnant women get to decide if they want their growing baby to live or die at any stage. That is not far from killing a baby once born, as Gosnel did, or even a toddler, a child. In tyrannical countries, and increasingly in America, human beings end up being valued not because they are of immeasurable spiritual worth created in the image of God with an immortal soul, but according to arbitrary decisions about factors such as size, ethnicity, sex, mental or physical characteristics, whether or not they are wanted, population control, and usefulness. For some time there have been leaders in America all for infanticide, including Margaret Sanger, the mother of legalized abortion, who was all about reducing, controlling, even exterminating, the black population. Yes, she was a huge racist all for genocide, at least in this form, the type of genocide that obliterates a whole race of people before they are big enough to defend themselves. Even today, percentage-wise, there are far more abortions of black babies in America (specifically including New York City) than of other ethnicities. In 2015, nationwide, 31 % of pregnancies of black women ended in abortion, while 11 % of pregnancies of white women ended in abortion. That's three times as many. And yet this hideous racial component, then and now inherent in the practice of legalized abortion, is swept under the rug by the pro-abortion mob. Yes New York, the ugly truth is that this whole abortion issue is highly racist at its core. Funny how those endlessly accusing others of racism these days are actually the real racists. Violent, deadly racists.

What if the government decided who could have babies and who couldn't, or whose babies could live and whose couldn't for whatever reason, or for no reason at all (mandatory abortion)? This sort of thing happened in Nazi Germany and is actually the case in China today (although the laws have been relaxed a tiny bit since 2013 because the birth rate fell too low, especially for females). It could conceivably happen anywhere. There is a Netflix series The Man in the High Castle, about America in WW II contrarily having been defeated by the Nazis and Japan, in which a neo-Nazi father in 1962 is supposed to immediately euthanize his golden teenage son because he has been diagnosed to have a debilitating genetic disease in its early stage. In this world no defective person is allowed to live. Isn't this New York law to allow anybody to arbitrarily kill unborn babies a definite step toward the government assuming that power at any stage of any person's life?  If God's standard is no longer upheld, if capricious governments decide to make up their own rules about the value or worthlessness of  this or that human life, why not?

No, it's not about a woman's rights. That's a distraction from the whole truth, the truth that rights come with adult responsibility and there is supposed to be a standard upheld for right behavior. Although racist at its core, and used to exploit unfortunate people and make money, the whole thing has also publicly become about removing the corresponding reproductive responsibility from the act of sex. In other words, people want people to be able to sex around all they want without any consequences. They want to all but eradicate the reproductive purpose of sex. But there is something that seems to have inevitably come along with that. Because people want to be irresponsible, or perhaps because people want to thumb their noses at traditional morality and/or God, or simply because anarchy sets the stage for power grabbing, we see people not only taking delight in the pleasures of thoughtless sex, but also delighting in the despising and destroying of human posterity. Apparently this is the inevitable outcome. 

That second part---the delight in despising and destroying of human life---was never part of  Roe v. Wade back in 1973. Back then there was no applauding and celebrating and lighting up the killing off of any fertilized embryo, much less pre-born babies perfectly viable or fully ready-to-be born. Like Glenn Beck said, can you imagine an animal control officer or vet, for example, celebrating, applauding, and lighting up the sky about the euthanizing of an animal or the destroying of its young at any stage? How psychotic does that sound? It's just sick! And yet, in the state of New York, this is going on in reference to numberless human beings---the most innocent of all humanity, the pre-born, what every one of us were at one time. There is no doubt that we are living among a certain form of psychopathic barbarians.

And as Herman Melville wrote, "I doubt it's ignorance that motives their actions." There is no excuse for ignorance as to the reproductive element of human sexual relations in this day and age. There is no excuse as to denying the humanity and viability of human life in the womb anymore, what with technology that makes possible detailed ultrasounds in increasing dimensions, in vitro surgery, the saving and care of even extremely premature infants, not to mention the truth exposed about the pain unborn babies experience and the brutality of all methods of abortion, or the sale of aborted babies' body parts being perpetrated. These days everyone knows that a human being is human at every stage. (How can they say the aborted baby isn't human when they turn around and sell its human body parts?)These days everyone knows something about the extremely savage and violent methods that are employed in destroying human life within a mother's womb. In advanced gestation cases the pulled-apart human pieces have to be puzzled together to make sure the entire body has been extracted! How can anyone say this is not murder, especially when the baby was at a stage to survive outside the womb? (I think it is a form of murder at any stage and for any reason, by the way.)

Inconveniently for the pro-abortion mob, premature babies are surviving at earlier and earlier stages of gestation. I was there when our triplet grandchildren were born in 2009 at 30 weeks---that's 6 1/2 months gestation, 2 1/2 months early. I had carried twins full term (both were over 7 pounds) so I never expected that my daughter (one of the twins) would go into labor so early, especially when she was on bed rest in the hospital being given all sorts of  prenatal, labor-checking care. The night of their birth, in my shock and gratitude I thanked the nurses for saving the babies' lives. They responded casually, "Oh, we didn't do that. They are fine, just feeders and growers." And yet they were so small I almost fainted when I first saw them, their little heads the size of oranges. They were perfectly formed, each just under 3 pounds. Today they are healthy normal nine-year-olds. Another baby was there at the hospital at the same time as the triplets who was born at 21 weeks and survived, cherished at every stage by her family. Decades ago, when I was a journalist, I did a story on the smallest baby ever born alive at the University of Utah. She was a pound and a half, the weight of a can of soda pop. A wedding ring fit on her thigh. Much to the joy of those who loved and cared for her, she thrived.


This same daughter with the triplets called me a few months ago almost hysterical with grief. I knew that for weeks she had been helping a co-worker with her early unwanted pregnancy, spending many hours trying to convince her not to have an abortion, explaining that she would regret it someday for all sorts of reasons (as many women now do). My daughter even said she would take the baby for her own. That morning the co-worker had arrived at work telling my daughter she had begun the process of termination, admitting that she knew it was selfish. She said she thought my daughter would not want to be friends anymore, but of course that didn't happen. My daughter was only struck with this girl's careless short-sightedness, with a sense of useless waste, and with a feeling of deep sorrow.

My question is: Where are the churches? Where are the ecclesiastical leaders speaking out ceaselessly against this most undeniable, inhumanity to man? They should be at the forefront, decrying this wickedness, this unnatural murderous barbarism directed at the most vulnerable of human beings. And if they aren't taking a stand against it anymore, are they for it?

We should weep at the brutal Nazi-esque inhumanity showcased by this new law in New York. We should weep at the callousness, the irresponsibility, the selfishness, and the hell, now and forever, awaiting the unrepentant people who do such deeds and the unrepentant people who support them. We should weep for the lost life, and for our children and grandchildren having to make their way in such an unfeeling, immoral, and wicked world, where evil is celebrated as good, and good is portrayed as evil.

Note 1/27/19: When we were at Utah's March for Life on January 26 we heard that the Catholic Church is pushing back on New York's Gov. Cuomo (who is Catholic) about this development.

Note 1/30/19: Today a Virginia legislator proposed the same sort of bill, which included the legalizing of killing a baby after birth, which Virginia's governor says he is fine with. Even though the bill was defeated in committee, the juggernaut has begun.

Note 2/3/19: We have been hearing that it is not uncommon across the United States in abortion clinics for babies born alive to be put aside and left to die.We  have also been hearing that several states have been allowing the practice of late-term abortion for many years. Perhaps what is new about the above development is the specific legalization and public celebration in no uncertain terms of full-term abortion, which there is never any need for and which is dangerous for the mother, and what people are calling infanticide, when a baby meant to be killed is born alive and neglected to death or killed in some other way post birth.

Note 2/4/19: According to a 2013 CA study cited by Glenn Beck, the great majority of women seeking late term abortions do so for reasons having nothing to do with their health, such as  she didn't know she was pregnant, she couldn't make up her mind if she wanted the baby, she needed insurance coverage, there were domestic issues, etc.

Note 2/26/19 We have changed the title of this post from The New York Baby Killers to The Nation's Baby Killers. This is because yesterday the U.S Senate voted on a bill that would require doctors to try to save babies born alive after abortion attempts,which bill was defeated 53 to 44. This means that our governing representatives have decided for us all that live newborn babies should be left to die, which is the same as killing them because newborn infants are completely helpless. And yet a mother who dumps her newborn in a dumpster or neglects her baby until it is sick or dead would definitely be arrested! This makes no sense. Unwanted human beings born under the watch of an abortion provider have no rights, but those born somewhere else or taken home do? Or not? These days who knows? But we do know this. Right now, incredibly,  the federal law is damnably silent on what to do with babies born alive who were intended to be born dead. It appears it is left up to state laws, and we know where that has gone: if people try to kill a baby before it is born in a designated facility, they are justified in killing it after it is born in that facility. This is obviously not about women's health. It appears it is just about getting rid of the victim/witness of attempted murder.

Very inconsistent, very wicked, and very scary.

Friday, January 4, 2019

A Cursing and a Confounding

-Janice Graham

I have read through an online thread about reactions to changes in the LDS temple proceedings. It is so sad and there is so much confusion.  People are taking so many different views, and it appears to me they all have a strictly temporal focus, as in what affects us only here and now. Mormons who are too afraid to think for themselves are either gushing about and/or rationalizing the changes like mere sycophants or they are completely closing up, all as if they were not blessed with minds and hearts and access to the Spirit to know truth from error for themselves. Regarding anyone who is thinking at all, these changes are making them mad, from the feminists to the chauvinists and everyone else in between. Does anyone see how we are being tossed to and fro, how people aren't thinking things through, how people can't communicate with each other, and how we are being discombobulated simply because we have put too much trust in human beings?

Yes, all of this I have been reading feels like a cursing.  Our thoughts and communications are being confounded. And yes, we Mormons do put too much trust in ourselves and each other and in our leaders. Just listen to us! We need to get back down to earth and place our very human feet firmly on the very real ground. Even our leaders, in choice moments, will admit they aren’t perfect, that none of them have been, and that we mustn’t live on borrowed light. As such, rather than a cursing and a confounding, this could be a huge teaching moment. We could actually start to learn some real and terrible and beautiful things.

You know, I haven't heard anyone turning to Christ in all this confusion. I don’t hear about anybody relying fully on Christ as the source of all knowledge and truth. I don’t hear people seeking the Lord’s solutions. People are suffering and upset. Why don’t they turn to the Lord? Instead, what I hear is people relying on words printed on paper or men who have risen to some position or their own passionate personal opinions. I haven’t heard anyone talk about how they feel they know such and so because they have prayed about it and it has been confirmed as true or not by the Holy Ghost. People don’t think to do this, not really, because they have dumped the burden and care of their personal religiosity on someone or something else. They are bitter and angry at the injustices of things and have made that their idol. Or they think they or somebody they know knows everything. Or they are sycophants. Or whatever. None of these are part of the gospel. They are actually the opposite of it.

Christian churches exist as a place to meet together often to discuss the eternal welfare of our immortal souls. They are supposed to supply teaching and preaching and rejoicing in Christ so we can know and continually be reminded of where to look for a remission of our sins. That is any Christian church’s primary job, and if it is inefficient or weak or faulty in that, all the extra stuff becomes at best a seemingly harmless distraction and at worst an outright demon, as C. S. Lewis warned. Sorry, churches are abdicating the very reason they exist if they seek to avoid confronting the now controversial doctrinal and moral questions and evils of the times (such as by shortening church meetings on the pretext that more should be taught in the home).

Not that these changes in the temple issues are not real or important. I am pretty sad that I unthinkingly made covenants 45 years ago that weren’t right and that somehow don’t apply the same way anymore. Yes, it's confusing. But like I said, this can be a great learning experience. We can be sadder, yes, but wiser, and isn’t wisdom more important? Through a series of life experiences I had to learn not to rely on people like I used to. I now do my own spiritual homework.  Sometimes it’s hard and it’s painful, but it’s worth it if you love God and truth and you want to grow spiritually.  Sometimes it’s pretty easy to see what’s been happening, but even then it’s painful because we have to give up even more of that pride and idolatry that we have again slipped into relying on. It’s also pretty lonely among fellow church members who don’t think this way at all, who go to church to get callings and be seen and feel better about themselves. I know, because I used to be somewhat like that.

A while ago I had to learn to look for the Lord’s solutions. Yes, all of us are fallen beings, sinners, and yes, we can repent because of Christ. Yes, the gospel of Jesus Christ can be defined in a few words. God loved our eternal souls so much He sent His Son to die for our sins so we can be saved if we repent. No, the gospel is not about family, or whether we are male or female. (God is no respecter of persons; all souls are equally valuable.) It isn't to make people feel better about themselves (except as children of God with immeasurable worth apart from anything else about them or what they do). The gospel is plain and precious and it can apply to the everyday life, moment by moment, of anyone who is humble enough to accept it and who desires to learn and grow spiritually.

Sadly, most people, even church-goers, maybe especially church-goers, resist these simple and true concepts. Perhaps they think taking responsibility for the condition of one's own soul is too much work. It is a lot of work, the most difficult type of work, spiritual work. When you do actually accept the gospel, you have to continually repent, as in seeking the still small voice of the Lord to know truth from error and be continually corrected and instructed, especially where human beings are concerned, including oneself, and even where the scriptures are concerned, which have been messed with by human beings for centuries and influenced by all sorts of cultures and interpretations. No, I don’t rely on certain paper with certain patterns of ink printed on it. I rely on what the Spirit of the Lord says to me about scripture. What I get is always simple and grounded and full of common sense. But you have to take your emotions out of it. You have to kill yourself off, as it were. You have to love God first. That’s why it’s the first commandment.

So why don’t we hear the plain applied gospel more regularly and clearly in all of our church venues? Why are other things emphasized in its place? You’ll figure that out soon enough if you truly seek the Lord. Yes, you will be sadder but you will be wiser, and grow spiritually.

Do your own spiritual work. Use the faculties God gave you. Put aside your grievances. Forgive and repent. Pray about what you know to be true about God's love, the gospel of Jesus Christ, and why you are here on earth. The Spirit will confirm what is true. You will learn terribly lovely things and become a new creature in Christ. The rest, of some value or mere pretense, is minutiae in comparison.

The Huge Horrific Health Hazards of Homosexuality Part I

-Janice Graham

PictureWe have referred to the book, The Health Hazards of Homosexuality: What the Medical and Psychological Research Reveals, produced by our friends at MassResistance in Massachusettes in 2017, multiple times in this blog. But we have never done a full book review, even though we believe a review must be done that is available for our readers. One reason for this is that I, who write the book reviews for Standard of Liberty and have been studying the issue of homosexuality for almost 20 years, have kept having to put the book aside. Although I have skimmed the book here and there, in the two years I have had it in my possession I have only gotten to page 98 in my actual reading, not because I am squeamish, but because because the truths this book exposes are so very dark and disturbing, and it is extremely sad and hard to believe that human beings would degrade themselves to this level. It makes one alternately cringe and weep. We are told in the foreword by Brian Camenker, "Some of the citations and images border on pornography so reader beware! The vulgarity, however exposes the very nature of homosexuality, It is one reason that homosexual health issues have not been presented truthfully to the public" p 1.

So we are only on page 98. Still, we have now decided to go ahead with our review, and begin to share what we have learned so far, hoping to continue reviewing this book in stages. You might say it is our New Year's resolution here at SoL. As most people will not be inclined or take the time to read this big book, we believe a series of short posts are very important.

For starters, even the obvious fact that this huge book outlining the health hazards of these now accepted and celebrated sexual behaviors consists of 500 dense pages, plus 100 more pages of teeny tiny end notes, speaks volumes. Alongside health hazards, are documented "homosexual ideologies, lifestyle, behaviors, and practices, referencing their public events, 'gay pride' parades, videos, conferences, publications, and websites,"whereby these health hazards are initiated and spread.

 In the forward we are told why this "untouchable" subject must be broached. "A disproportionate incidence of pathologies is found among homosexual men, lesbians, and bisexuals. Yet the general public is told very little, if anything about the baneful nature of homosexuality and its associated addictions and behaviors. . . For too long, honest discussion on this subject has been blocked by intimidation and even outright threats." (We here at SoL have received many threats ourselves, including a terroristic threat which had to be turned over to the FBI.)

Wild Elephant by Janice Barrett GrahamBut it's not intimidation and threats that keep the decent general public from confronting this topic, a topic that is force-fed to their children and plastered all over their culture. It's self-imposed ignorance for whatever the reason, as if responsible, thinking human beings should act like the three monkeys with their hands pressed over their eyes, ears, and mouths. For example, one time we at Standard of Liberty were at an event talking to a family about our book for families raising children, Wild Elephant: The Gospel Truth about Today's Stampeding Sexuality," offering them a free copy. The father replied, "Well if we ever have that problem, I suppose we can get it then."

Unfortunately, this is the attitude most people have about this issue. They don't realize that bad ideas about human sexuality are being modeled, taught, and propagandized through every existing societal institution, and that proper information can prevent these bad ideas from taking root, warn people against them, and heal those who are exposed and exploited. Health Hazards exists to show that homosexuality is "not just a private personal issue; it is an important public health issue." Its producers "hope that the information in this book will encourage our society to take a step back, understand what the normalization of homosexuality has brought in its wake, and reconsider the course we're on."

Besides learning about specific health hazards common among LGBT people such as pornography addiction; shortened lifespan; mental illness, suicidality, anxiety and depression; the incurable disease HIV/AIDS and every other STD; co-infections; other diseases such as staph, hepititis, cancers, and tuberculosis; chronic conditions and illnesses; medicine drug side-effects; substance abuse, and partner abuse, I also learned more specifically about how homosex is most definitely a public health crisis, and how "greater societal acceptance of homosexuality has resulted in even more disease and suffering." The book must be read individually to realize in full the myriad dangers and truly staggering statistics.

Deviant sexual behaviors, because they usually include sodomy, a practice that until 2009 was posted by the Surgeon General and the FDA as "simply too risky to practice," p 10,  are often hundreds and even thousands of times more dangerous than normal intercourse. But in this short review I will name two main thoughts from my reading so far that hit me like a ton of bricks. The first concerns what is referred to as bisexuality.

It is no wonder that the excuse for unlimited debauchery called bisexuality (and also pansexuality) is on the rise. The endless alphabet letters popularly delineating this and that sexual orientation, are nothing more than pretend names for zero sexual boundaries. Turns out the B in LGBT, that doesn't seen to get much attention, is more dangerous than the L or the G or the T! I never thought of this before. Yes, bisexuals are in more danger from their behaviors than any of the others. Evidently, the more types of sex you abuse, the more at risk you are for more diseases and more illnesses.

The second fact to hit me like a brick in the first 98 pages of this book is this: The acceptance of homosexuality, i.e. sodomy, has encouraged this behavior among straight people.

 I should have realized this way back when, when I happened to be talking to a girl at the Utah Pride Center about a youth event SoL was opposing, arguing that the Pride Center was encouraging the practice of sodomy for minors. She said to me in no uncertain terms, "Every Body Does It."  I shot back at her in no uncertain terms, "Decent People Don't." Funny how she shut up after that.

It makes sense that if homosexuality is perfectly wonderful and normal and pleasurable and safe, or that society is portraying it as such, which it most certainly is, straight people would begin to practice sodomy as well and some of the same diseases and illnesses will afflict the supposed purely heterosexual population. Indeed, we have heard this is an option young people are being presented with, even virginal newlyweds! Please note: "Acting as the 'receptive partner' ('bottom') is riskiest of all, because the rectum was not made for such use and is easily damaged by penetration [by the penis]" p 11. In a heterosexual couple, this always means the female. This is when I weep.

To paraphrase C. S. Lewis, there is a quality of sadism that can be encouraged in sex. Sodomitic practices are definitely sadistic. So now, because of the acceptance of homosex as normal, sexy, exciting, and because of that oversexualizing of human beings, heterosex is becoming increasingly grossly distorted.

Here is an example of how none of this gay stuff is about anybody's "orientation" or "sexual identity." I happened to watch a documentary about what goes on in Hollywood behind the scenes.  We don't have much doubt that this sort of thing does really happen. These days, if a young actor of either sex, and especially black, wants to make it in the business, they are subjected to what amounts to gang rape of every type perpetrated by the elite old men in charge of  casting movies, and even commercials. They show them what is going to be done to them, make them sign a paper, threaten to empty their bank accounts, if they don't allow them to desecrate their body in unspeakable ways. The poor aspiring young actor or actress thinks it will be a one-time thing, but oh no. Every time they want a part, they are again taken up to some fancy hotel room. It is reportedly worse for the females simply because they have more orifices to defile. Are these perpetrators gay, homosexual, or bisexual? No. Those are just names used to excuse and legitimize and promote sex of all kinds. These men are not "gay." They most likely have wives and families. What they are are horrible, predatory, opportunistic perverts. It's just sex, sex, and more sex, in any way they can possibly imagine.

Turns out this has been the end game since the beginning. It's not really about gay or any other fancy pretend sexual orientation or made-up  hundred-and-one genders. It's about the promotion of Godless sexual immorality across the board. You know, like in Sodom and Gomorrah.

To summarize, the B in LGBT, bisexuality, meaning anything goes, is way more risky than any other behavior, and the wholesale societal acceptance of homosex has resulted in sodomitic practices and their corresponding health hazards increasing in the general population as well.

Here's hoping I can get through enough of the book to do Part II, that is, if I can pry my eyes open and then read through my tears. Then wash myself off or go running or something.

You're welcome.