Poor liberal arguments, paired with the lewd behavior of some attendees at a White House event, have recently shone some light on the truth of the issue of same-sex marriage and the LGBT movement.
There have been some pretty bold statements lately from the left about those who prescribe to the Bible’s teachings concerning homosexual behavior. Their poor arguments, as well as the unsavory behavior of at least two in attendance at the recent “Gay Pride Month” reception at the White House, lend little credibility toward the socially “progressive” causes of same-sex marriage and public acceptance of the “alternative” lifestyles of those of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) movement.
These two White House visitors posed for a photograph while making obscene hand gestures in front of the official portrait of Ronald Reagan. These photos appeared online in a Philadelphia magazine and have likely circulated elsewhere on the Internet by now. For those of us who were alive during the Reagan Administration, we know what he stood for. He stood for individual freedom and success, limited government intrusion, a strong national defense, respect for our nation’s founding, and protection of religious freedom and traditional values, to name just a few things. It seems obvious what these two individuals thought of such things and the man who promoted them. It also seems ironic, not only that these individuals were allowed to display such behavior in the White House, but that they have gained public exposure as representatives of the gay movement. While those who support these untraditional and unnatural lifestyles are attempting to promote this behavior as normal and mainstream, these two people have become the most notable faces of the movement, coming out of this White House event. Out of all representatives of the movement, these two were among those who made the White House cut and posed for photo ops.
Also, in the aftermath of Obama’s timely public statement in support of same-sex marriage, many liberally-biased media outlets have published articles that condemn those who follow the Biblical exclusion of homosexuals, comparing this stance with the historical stance of some American slave owners who used Bible scripture to excuse the practice of slavery. Other articles even went on to accuse many black churches of “hypocrisy” in their stance against homosexuality, in that their enslaved ancestors’ owners used the Bible to defend slavery. The authors of the articles advised them, and all of us, that we would do well to find ourselves on the “right side” of this issue as dictated by public opinion. In other words, “We don’t care what your Bible says; you’d better join the winning side.” What a dangerous and regressive position!
On its face, this argumentative example is a very poor one. First, several Bible passages very clearly condemn the practice of slavery as much as the practice of homosexuality. In the New Testament, 1 Timothy 1:9-10 describes those for whom the law exists, naming various undesirable behaviors, and describes homosexual behavior in its list of transgressions, just before “menstealers,” or enslavers as understood in modern society. Ephesians 6:5 does read: “Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters,” but the following verse 9 also instructs masters to forbear “threatening: knowing that your Master also is in heaven, neither is their respect of persons with him.” Also, from a historical viewpoint, it should be understood that there was little concept of slavery like that of the brand of early American slavery, including human kidnapping and trade, during the time the Bible was penned. In Old Testament times, the most common practice remotely resembling slavery was entered into voluntarily as a means to support one’s family. A contract of sorts only bound the enslaved, or servant, for six years. After this period, the person was allowed to live wherever they chose, and according to a literal interpretation of Deuteronomy 23:15-16, the Bible clearly forbids fugitive slave laws to be enacted for those who were to leave before the completion of their contract. Even in these earliest times, under Mosaic Law, Exodus 21:16 reads, “And he that stealeth a man and selleth him, or if he be found in his hand, he shall surely be put to death.” The obvious point is this: when the American slave owners used scripture to excuse or endorse slavery, they did so using an erroneous misinterpretation of the Bible. When modern Christian conservatives use scripture to condemn the practice of homosexuality, they do so using a literal, fundamental, and rightly divided interpretation of the Bible found in both the Old and New Testaments. Once again, the liberal argument is illogical and false.
The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by WesternJournalism.com.