Sunday, September 16, 2018

SUNDAY TIP: THE SAY ANYTHING CAUCUS KICKS INTO HIGH GEAR

[MAKE SURE TO READ THIS LINK FIRST IF THIS IS YOUR FIRST TIME VISITING ENGLISH MANIF.]



In some ways I fear the pro-LGBT lobby most when they are threatened. In my experience, when they start losing, they get desperate. And when they get desperate they behave like any wild rabid beast backed into a corner. For instance, on the night Proposition 8 passed in California, the LGBT lobby went into savage mode, rioting and doxxing random people who contributed to the campaign. Brendan Eich was but one of many casualties.

Right now the LGBT faces a perfect storm. Let's review where they are right now. They have emerged from a string of victories. Their victories resulted in the following:


  • An enormous constituency of LGBTs and "allies."

  • The burden of an unfathomable number of lies they told and false notions they foisted on people to persuade them that homosexuality and transgenderism were normal and harmless. Every gay and trans "body" represents a ticking time bomb, since everyone who falls into homosexuality and transgenderism runs a high risk of realizing that sodomy and self-mutilation harm them and do not represent normal or harmless behavior.

  • An unstable constituency that includes many people who jumped into their community based on lies that now they may see as false. At any moment they may red-pill.

  • A trail of people they mistreated, abused, silenced, smeared, and slandered, everyone from Kim Davis to the porn actress who killed herself after being attacked online for refusing sex with a gay co-star.

  • An enormous and expensive infrastructure of lobbying arms with growing headcount and dwindling reasons to exist, since there is almost no homophobia to be found anywhere.

  • A huge array of social problems the LGBT movement caused but never had any plan or intention to address in any meaningful way: drug addiction, rampant promiscuity, sexual diseases, eating disorders, depression, anxiety, trafficking of infants under "gay adoption," intimate partner violence, sexual assault, and more problems than you can possibly imagine. Anyone with two brain cells could predict that a movement full of lascivious behavior, unrealistic delusions of victimhood, aggressive and manipulative power tactics, lots of money, and endless access to young people through the institutions they subverted, would produce a large number of unhappy, self-harming, litigious, unpleasant, unhealthy, vicious, and unlikable people. So the more success the LGBT movement has, the more LGBTs become dreaded. People think, "uh oh, here comes one of them, nobody say anything that could lead to a lawsuit." And of course the end result is people don't want to be around LGBTs, which makes them lonelier. The LGBT movement can only blame homophobia for so long until people figure out that LGBT leaders are the problem.

  • A growing spiritual malaise as LGBT activists must explain to their myriad constituents why they feel a gaping hole in their hearts. Taking over the schools, the military, commerce, government, courts, academia, the press, social media, and professional organizations still cannot change the fact that God reigns higher than all those things. And God loves everybody, but He hates homosexuality. So the LGBT movement doomed its followers to misery when it convinced them that they were homosexuality, convincing them that they could never separate their identity from the unhealthy and abominable things they did with their lower regions. Day after day, gay people carry on with their business, enjoying the forced sympathy and feigned approval of all the neighbors they have dragooned and sued into submission. And then they lie in bed at night and know in their hearts that a God exists somewhere whose design for their bodies and hearts they disgrace and disobey each day. Every time the LGBT movement forces its way into an institution, LGBTs realize they have no respect for any institution that would submit to them. Yet they do not seem to realize that it is they who ruin all they take over. So they move on to the next one. They take over the colleges, then grow tired of them. So they go to the churches. They take over the low-hanging fruit like the Episcopal Church or the Methodists, only to lose all respect for such institutions since they know intuitively that their pro-gay theology must be forced and dishonest. So they go to conservative institutions, as if taking over those will not render them unlivable in turn. This is the doom loop where LGBT liberation will take them again and again.

  • Many victims. The tactics the LGBT lobby used to recruit and initiate young people into gay sex or transitioning leave all the scars that one would expect of compulsion, manipulation, and trickery. Many people turned to gay life through sexual exploitation or assault. Many people got stuck in gay or trans life because they perceived a threat and humiliation if they dared to go back on their earlier "coming out." The ticking time bomb ticks and ticks. We wait for this volcano of resentment and righteous rage to explode.
Stuck in what can only be described as a fatal rut and spiritual dead end, the LGBTs have cobbled together an agenda that will keep themselves busy, they hope, for long enough until they can think of some way to escape the ditch into which they have driven millions of souls.

  • They began 2018 with the express goal of hitching themselves to all the groups that resent Trump. This required even more leaps in logic since Trump has done virtually nothing homophobic or transphobic in his entire life.

  • They decided they would make "conversion therapy" their cause célèbre of the year. This required inventing a crisis out of whole cloth, complete with phony statistics pulled out of thin air about hundreds of thousands of innocent gays sent to re-education camps. And they needed lots of well-coached performances like the tearjerking speeches at the Church of England synod in 2017. They had to revive urban legends about people who got electro-shocked. It required inventing convoluted rebuttals to undermine anybody who came out of homosexuality or de-transitioned.

  • They felt this was the year to checkmate the last of the churches that had not been beaten into pro-gay submission, particularly the Southern Baptist Convention, Roman Catholic Church, and Presbyterian Church of America. They have plans for the Orthodox too. 
Perhaps the items above could have proceeded according to plan, but alas, providence is not on the side of the LGBT movement. The MeToo movement keeps inching closer and closer to the bombshell moment when people ask tough questions about the sexual abuse, statutory rape, domestic violence, sexual harassment, stalking, and degrading behavior within the gay community, committed by gay people. Same goes for the trans. The Human Rights Campaign keeps dancing around its Terry Bean problem (look him up), but eventually the music will stop and people will figure out that much of the gay movement sprang like Athena fully armed from the brains of men who liked sleeping with younger, vulnerable male victims. In a MeToo kind of world, even if they were above the age of eighteen people still judge harshly the lurid age differential of a Dustin Lance Black meeting a Tom Daly. 

Taking over the churches has proved a bit trickier than taking over the universities. Grassroots Christians mobilized quickly to fight back against the "stay gay" bill in California, turning the "conversion therapy bans" into box-office poison. For years people have gone along with these bans on ex-gay counseling; now much of the public realizes that the attempts to force people to remain homosexual even if they got to homosexuality through abuse is extremely abusive. In a MeToo kind of world, it won't fly. Also, the LGBT movement is stuck with the plentiful proof of how they forced highly inappropriate content into children's media, children's libraries, and young children's curriculum. Everything about the LGBT movement smells terrible in a world that has decided it doesn't like sexual harassment or generally sleazy behavior.

The Catholic Church is a smoking Hindenburg and unfortunately it has all the elements that gay activists don't want right now. Unlike in 2002, people's outrage is not limited to outrage over priests abusing young children. Now people are also outraged about male priests abusing, raping, harassing, seducing, pressuring, and exploiting young men in their teenage years, in their seminary years, in their twenties, and beyond. Welcome to MeToo 2.0, the gay version. Everything the gays loved about the Catholic Church since the days of the Venerable Bede--the plethora of all-male spaces, the handsome bodies fed only vegetables and kept on a poverty regime, the power to know everyone's secrets and boss around people as if you speak with all the authority of God, the flashy costumes and utensils--now makes the public hyper-aware that the Catholic Church is an extremely homosexual institution. And a syllogism follows:

Premise 1: Everything about the Catholic Church is gay.
Premise 2: The Catholic Church has a problem.

Conclusion: The Catholic Church's problem is it's too gay.
Lesson: Gayness destroys whatever place where it can proliferate.

Gay men carried out the abuse and harassment against victimized men. Uh oh. They can't pull the old "everyone accusing us of this is just really a closeted gay" routine, since that sounds like bullying and victim-shaming, which we can't do in a MeToo era. They can't pretend that it isn't a gay problem since we've all been forced to consume so much gay narrative over the last twenty years, gaydar is universal. They can't claim the Catholic Church is homophobic and the real problem is that gays need more acceptance, since we were all watching while Pope Francis forced conscientious Catholics to stay quiet for years while he let half the Church come out of the closet and he pushed Amoris Laetitia on us.

And just as the Catholics are letting down the gays, the evangelicals have decided they don't want to listen to gay people whine anymore. Having turned the Episcopal Church, the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America, the United Methodist Church, the Presbyterian Church-USA, the Anglican Church, and a gazillion other denominations into more boring versions of the Metropolitan Church (which is so gay that gay people aren't satisfied belonging to it!), the gays keep coming up with new talking points to convince the Southern Baptists and remaining evangelicals to become gay-affirming.

This summer, they organized a conference called ReVoice, which was meant to sell a new gay identity politics to Presbyterians and Baptists. The conference seems to have been born as Act I of a series of conferences designed to convince evangelicals that everything gay is wonderful: A leadership conference led by Preston Sprinkle in Los Angeles, a "Love Boldly" conference in Cincinnati, and more. 

You can tell with all four of these events that the landscape surrounding the organizers changed drastically between the time they came up with their plans and now. Perhaps a year ago when they thought to hold these events and secured funding, they assumed people would never come to doubt the status of gay people as victims. They thought "gay" would still attract sympathy rather than signal sleaziness and sexual excess to a country immersed in a sex panic. 

So everything changed and the gays are expecting apologies from Christian churches that have freaked out about drag queens reading books about homosexuality to toddlers--Christian churches that do not want people with highly sexualized identities coming to their campuses to bring the risk of more sex abuse scandals, litigations, and emotional wreckage.

Gays venturing into evangelical activism are pushing the anti-conversion-therapy talking points, trying to say that heterosexuality and the nuclear family are overrated. In a MeToo kind of world, where everyone just got orders to weep over nuclear families torn apart at the US-Mexico border, "tone deaf" does not even begin to describe the look these conferences are giving. They promise holy gay celibacy when we know about tens of thousands of rapes by gay Catholic priests who took vows of celibacy. They say heterosexuality is fallen and marriage does not matter at a time when the mood stands against feckless rakes who go around groping girls and cheating on their wives--do they really want us to believe that heterosexuality is not important enough to ask people to work at it? And why push non-nuclear families when everyone worries about separation of parents from children and child trafficking?

You can almost hear the crowd say, "and tell me why we should feel sympathetic to a middle-aged man who leaves his wife of thirty years to marry a twenty-year-old just because he came out as gay?"

So everyone who hitched their wagons to the LGBT movement finds themselves hitched to a sleaze cab. They must embrace the sleaze, like Anne Hathaway talking about how much she loves the gays at the Human Rights Campaign dinner. Or they must distance themselves, like Christian leaders pretending they weren't meeting with sleazy gay activists for years behind the scenes. Or they must....

What do they do? I don't know. This is what scares me. They may invent a whole bunch of new scandals to distract people from what is going on. But the chances of a Matthew Shepard incident falling into their laps with perfect timing seem rather unlikely. In this media-saturated world they will not be able to control the narrative and few will believe in a tale of "pure homophobia" after all the hoaxes and false alarms. And one needs some lucky timing to come up with a straight-up homophobic killing that does not involve prostitution, a drug deal, someone stalking someone else, or a gay killer killing a gay victim.

They cannot threaten suicide en masse as they did in the past, since at this point, everyone will wonder why we made all these concessions to the gay movement if they cannot prevent mass suicide from the huge constituency we allowed them to recruit and control.

They may try to smear key commentators with new blacklists, perhaps inventing fake scandals to destroy reputations again. But there seem too many people to smear and the public's patience grows thin with all the blacklisting, foul language, pornographic imagery, and hysteria.

Here are some tricks they may use:

  • Likely they will pull out their wordsmiths. They will craft stories that hit the perfect note so they can talk themselves out of a jam. They may try to claim that all the scandals are the fault of lingering homophobia and closeted gays not like themselves. I doubt that will work. I see they tried to push a cause célèbre in the form of a dispute between a Jewish homosexual student and a Jewish woman who mentored him at New York University. The handsome young gay accused the dowager of sexual harassment and retaliation. But this feint will not carry the day, since the American public has gay fatigue and no longer takes every gay tragedy at face value. The average reader must wonder how an able-bodied man in his late twenties (even if he is gay!) could feel threatened by a woman in her sixties.

  • They may deflect onto heterosexual sins. So for instance they may say that sex abuse is not just a Catholic problem, but a Protestant problem too! And then they may try to get everyone talking about straight Protestant men raping Protestant girls in Protestant churches. This will likely not work because the Catholic scandal is too huge and it's so obviously a gay problem, and plus people have already had a year of MeToo telling them how horrible straight people are. There is not much new and exciting in telling us straight men abuse females. As a deflection tactic, it's like trying to get people to look away from a car wreck by pointing out how expensive the tolls on the highway are.

  • They may search for ever more conniving forms of infiltration, to send moles into all the conservative organizations with the goal of running interference on the public discussion. Here perhaps they have some possibilities. They can do some of their usual psychological operations, sending in some spies to figure out who the weak links within the conservative movement are. They can plant some Manchurian candidates in to offer poison-pill talking points that look good but really mean to make the Christian witness against homosexuality implode. At this point this will likely fail also because all the previous buyouts, bribery, and graft that have helped gays take over all the denominations and other institutions have forced Biblical Christians to function as a scattershot, decentralized Hydra. And at some point the gays will run out of money and won't be able to buy off everyone anymore.
With things looking this bleak for the LGBT movement, I fear they may resort to terrorism, bank robbery, massive fraud, or corrupt deals with some mafia overseas. It could get ugly.

One thing I can predict. 

We will kick into "say anything" mode. The LGBTs will try every possible rhetorical tactic, quoting any scripture they can and delivering a ridiculous exegesis with a straight face in the hopes of cowing Christians back into the submission and gullibility that allowed homosexuality to steamroll the Christian world.

They will say heterosexuality is a sin! They will say it is a sin to criticize gays for doing things considered sins by others. They will say straight people are worse. They will say we need their help with interior decorating or else our stained-glass windows will start looking tacky, so we can't kick them out. They will get recordings and secret video of us and doctor it to make us look awful. They will call us fat, ugly, stupid, bigots, closeted gays, and terrible people.

They will say anything because nothing can really save their movement now. And that's what scares me. 

Wednesday, August 29, 2018

WED TIP: DON'T DROWN IN MUSH--HOW TO RESPOND TO ARTICLES LIKE THIS ONE BY JACKIE HILL

[MAKE SURE TO READ THIS LINK FIRST IF THIS IS YOUR FIRST TIME VISITING ENGLISH MANIF.]

Somebody forwarded me this article by someone named Jackie Hill Perry:


I don't know anything about Jackie Hill Perry. Judging from the date of publication this article appears to be part of the massive effort to discredit conversion therapy. I will comment on her article, which bears the rebarbative title "Don't Preach a Heterosexual Gospel," with the assumption that she has pure motives and is simply wrong about what she thinks she is reacting to. 

Irrespective of whatever pure motives Jackie Hill Perry may have, in context we have to be realistic about why this article is being published and pushed on social media. There is a well-funded and aggressive LGBT initiative to displace orthodox leadership in Christian churches. The goal is to replace Bible-based shepherds with carefully selected leaders who are sympathetic to LGBT Christianity. To pass the LGBT litmus test and get liberal backing to overthrow orthodox Christians, candidates must be steeped in the false theology underpinning so-called gay Christianity, and predisposed to enforce pro-gay conformity by attacking people who want to maintain a proper Gospel position on sexuality.

Behind all of this is a brain trust of activists. They have been coached and educated at the elite schools one sees at gatherings such as the American Academy of Religion. Well groomed in strategy, they know that not all activists can be aggressive street fighters like Dan Savage or ACTUP or the lawsuit-chasers hauling Christians into court over same-sex wedding services. Their master goal is elimination of Christian denominations that keep alive the Bible's position on chastity. To do this they know that some activists have to act in stealth mode. Stealth activists must present themselves as moderates or even as purists themselves, while they help the LGBT advance their next move.

Central to the LGBT agenda right now is the eradication of conversion therapy. Eradication must occur on such a scale that basic conversations about helping people cease gay identity and change toward heterosexuality will be illegal and thoroughly disdained by the culture. The LGBT apparatus' legal and institutional power hang on their claim that they form a stable constituency whose common identifier, their sexual identity, is innate from birth and unchangeable. If it is changeable, then people can leave. If people can leave their community, they will. For gay communities are notoriously unsupportive and mentally unhealthy. The sex acts associated with homosexuality are objectively dangerous and disease-carrying. 

If LGBT strategists can hold the line against any conversion therapy for long enough, they can convince just enough generations to remain in ironclad sexual classifications until new generations will be born who have never met anyone who has gone from gay to straight. As the LGBT movement already invades youth groups, schools, children's libraries, children's media, and church youth groups, the LGBT movement will have a captive constituency. This means a large demographic for whom the LGBT leaders can claim to speak and with whose capital they can bargain for power. These dreams of power will evaporate, however, if large numbers of people realize how easy it is to go from gay to straight.

So let's get to Perry's article. She begins with this confident topic sentence:

God isn't calling gay people to be straight.
You’d think He was by listening to the ways Christians try to encourage same-sex-attracted people within, or outside, their local churches. They dangle the possibility of heterosexual marriage above their heads, point to it like it’s heaven on a string, something to grab and get whole with. And though it’s usually well-meaning, it’s very dangerous. Why? Because it puts more emphasis on marriage as the goal of the Christian life than knowing Jesus. Just as God’s aim in my salvation was not mainly the removal of my same-sex desires, in sanctification, it is not always His aim that marriage or experiencing an attraction for the opposite sex will be involved.


Let me break down what she's saying. Then I will explain how this relates to the larger political issues I began this post with.

First, what on earth does she mean by "God isn't calling gay people to be straight"? I am sure she will claim she is Biblical. Yet this has no grounding in the Bible whatsoever. God designed males and females to be partners with each other, as explained in Genesis and reiterated by Jesus Himself in Matthew 19 and Mark 10. Additionally one finds copious affirmations of this design by Paul in the New Testament. Song of Songs describes a man and woman together; no book describes homosexuality in such a fashion. The fifth commandment says "honor thy mother and thy father," clearly referring to a male and female source of life rooted in the command that men and women form monogamous sexual bonds involving intercourse, mutual pleasure, and children.

That's the "pro-straight" stuff. The "anti-gay" stuff is quite voluminous as well. Sodom is destroyed when the city collapses into rampant homosexuality (and no, Ezekiel's prophecy does not override this and make it all about gluttony and inhospitality.) The "clobber verses" with which we are all familiar by now make it clear that from Abraham to Moses to Ezekiel to Jesus to Paul to Jude, the voices in the Bible are crystal-clear that homosexuality violates God's design for sex and that the punishment for violating God's design for sex is severe because it angers God.

As Christians we believe God wants us to honor Him and draw near to Him. God calls us to live by His design and love Him with all our heart, mind, body, and soul. The New Testament is clear that repentance matters. So does transformation into a new creation. The old person we were but are no longer, may be full of sin and violations against God's will. That becomes our past. As we come closer to God we will move away from violating His design and become more like the people He designed us to be.

Like many other commentators on this topic, Jackie Hill Perry may play games with the terminology, saying "straight" and "heterosexual" carry specific cultural freight tied to our context. Even if that is true, there is no other word available to us that clearly refers to the model of a man and woman enacting God's design for sex---one man having intercourse with one woman. If we just want to call that chastity or true marriage, fine. But heterosexuality is an intrinsic part of chastity or true marriage. Chaste sex always involves a heterosexual act. True marriage is true to the extent that it is heterosexual and monogamous.

Jackie Hill Perry has no grounds to claim that God does not want gay people to become straight. Nothing in the Bible gives us license to attribute lifelong "gay" identities to people. We know from the Bible and from world history that "being gay" is a modern concept with very little basis in human development and no basis in God's Word. Nobody is gay. Behaviors, events, cultural tendencies, and ideas may be gay. But "gay" does not describe a person.

Every person is created by God to be a male in a body designed to copulate with a woman, or a female in a body designed to copulate with a man. The genitalia are part of God's design; Paul explains in Romans 1 that even people who have not yet been won to Christ can see from our bodies what God intended for us.

If any occasion calls  for saying someone "is" a sexual identity, then everyone is straight. People whom Jackie Hill Perry calls "gay" are really straight people who are acting gay. They need to stop acting gay and be what God wanted them to be. We can spend years playing around with the vocabulary, but the basic truth here is unavoidable. God's will is that people who say "I am gay" stop saying that and act the way people who say "I am straight" tend to act (allowing, of course, for the fact that many "straight" people commit other sexual sins that God does not want.) 

The bottom line is that someone who is acting gay is always better off moving more toward straight behavior and identity. This is not a minor issue. I minister to many young men who struggle with homosexual impulses that came from porn, abuse, social contagion, personal trauma, or other corrupt influences. When I coach them, it is not healthy to tell them that they have nowhere to go on their journey, other than to repeat empty phrases to themselves about how homosexuality is a sin but they don't have to become heterosexual. That's mush. It's a mess. I expound on this in the video below:


Okay, let's move to the next claim of Jackie Hill Perry's opening paragraph. She uses a classic straw man tactic. She opens up with the revolutionary and invalid idea that God does not want gay people to become straight. Then she softens the obvious weaknesses in her claim by contrasting her claim against the supposedly ridiculous claim by other Christians who, she says, are "dangling marriage" before gays as if it is the only answer. She says these Christians make everything about becoming heterosexual instead of about coming to Christ.

If I came across Christians who reduced gay people's life issues to becoming straight and who didn't really care about these gay people coming close to God, I would be rightly horrified. I haven't seen such people. All the Christians I know are working from the playbook given to us by Jesus and Paul. Jesus talked about eunuchs in Matthew 19, so He carved out a status that would involve refraining from sex and marriage altogether. In 1 Corinthians, Paul expands on this to talk about the joys of celibacy for those who can handle it. But Paul qualifies this very importantly, saying that "it is better to marry than to burn." In order to avoid immorality, unless one is gifted with a lack of sexual urges, Paul says, each man should take a wife; each woman should take a husband.

I cannot speak for who fits the model of discipleship Jackie Hill Perry has in mind. I know from the people I disciple that overwhelmingly they burn with sexual passion and need to get married. Most men I disciple also do want children. There is nothing wrong with them wanting to be fathers and certainly nothing wrong with wanting to have a sex life within proper marriage. God rejoices when a man and wife lie together. I am confident that it pleases God when a man thinks positively in his mind and heart about his wife or about one day having a wife. God is never pleased when someone engages in homosexual acts or homosexual thoughts. So even somebody who is celibate has to become "straight" anyway; such a person needs to think positively about the idea of a man and woman being together. Such a person must also think of homosexuality as a sin, something to be rejected and avoided. So no matter how you slice and dice the words, the main part of ministry in this area involves getting people who say they are gay to stop being or acting gay, and to go straight.

So why does this matter so much?

Let's say Jackie Hill Perry's motives are pure. She may have spent a lot of time thinking about these issues and this may be the idea she has come to. I feel certain she is wrong but that says nothing about her character.

The larger context is most certainly not pure, though. The fact that her article got published and promoted with this carefully phrased verbiage reflects the political threat to Christianity of the LGBT movement. By discrediting (by misrepresenting) the ministry of those who help people go from gay to straight, her work boosts the LGBT movement's ultimate goal which is to build for itself a captive constituency. If the LGBTs can shut down and destroy ex-gay ministries, then most people Jackie Hill Perry calls "gay" will muddle around in a no-man's land of ambiguity, confusion, and wasted time, and will probably slide into identifying as gay Christians.