|
|
|
Why the "Sin" Argument
doesn't work |
|
"Conservative Christians often label homosexuality as a sin to
drive home their position. The problem is, homosexual
conduct is listed with a number of sexual practices many
couples enjoy including fellatio, masturbation, fantasy and
sodomy between husband and wife. And some not so healthy
practices like sex before marriage and adultery.
The Bible does not afford a different degree of sin to any of
these behaviors, rather it labels them all as such.
Another important lesson the Bible teaches is found in the
story of Mary Magdalene at which point Jesus states "Let he
who is without sin cast the first stone."
We cannot be selective sinners and expect others to adhere to
our opinions. The fact is, if you follow the Bible as an
absolute, the intimation of those using the sin argument about
homosexuality, prior to condemning other's behavior as sin and
yours as righteous, you must first be free of sin yourself.
Christianity and Judaism teach that ultimately God holds the
power to determine whether we are righteous or not. As
humans, we are not given the authority to condemn others in
His name. He alone reserves that right.
It is for this reason that an argument of righteousness
against a group of people whom practice a different sin than
yours can only fail. It is the ultimate hypocrisy and
the quickest way to alienate a society against an idea."
Laura Dawn
Lewis
. |
|
The North American Man-Boy Love
Association, or NAMBLA, included this quote from Califia-Rice on
its website (until they were forced to take the site down in May
2002 after the Catholic Priest scandal began gaining
momentum):
"Boy-lovers and the lesbians who have young lovers
are the only people offering a hand to help young women and men
cross the difficult terrain between straight society and the gay
community. They are not child molesters. The child abusers are
priests, teachers, therapists, cops and parents who force their
stale morality onto the young people in their custody.
Instead
of condemning pedophiles for their involvement with lesbian and
gay youth, we should be supporting them." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 2002
|
Gays, Lesbians, Tolerance,
Schools and Children
By Laura Dawn Lewis
For the past
3 decades the gay rights movement has been
gaining ground and pushing an agenda of social
acceptance for their lifestyle. More films are
produced promoting the lifestyle, books are
geared directly at the choice and it has become so
prevalent in erotic literature that you’d be hard
pressed to find anything that does not contain at least
one lesbian scene. |
|
|
Should
Elementary Age Students be required to Watch Plays
Advocating Acceptance of Homosexuality?
Should parents
be forced by the State against their wishes to have
their children taught such?
BOTTOM LINE |
|
In 2000, the
California Student Safety and Violence Prevention Act, Assembly
Bill 537 was passed. This bill added sexual orientation and gender
discrimination to the state's nondiscriminatory policy.
Politically correct speech has branded anyone who
disagrees with this lifestyle as homophobic, fanatical or right-wing religious. Most recently in February 2002, eight parents
brought a suit against the Novato Unified School District in
Marin County, California. During February and March 2001 the
school district brought in the Los Angeles-based
pro-homosexuality theater company Fringe Benefits
to perform a series of skits called "Cootie Shots: Theatrical
Inoculations Against Bigotry." Three of the skits included
overt mentions of “Gay is Okay”. The students were second
graders and the stated objective of the play was to address
issues of discrimination and prejudice. Prior to the Marin
County presentations this same play was performed in the LA
Unified School District during 2000 and recent state laws
intimate that this curriculum should be included in all public
schools.
The parents suing stated they filed opt-out forms for
their children releasing them from any classes on family life
and other issues that might conflict with their religious
training and beliefs. The Novato parents assert these opt-out forms were
ignored. TOP
Question:
Can a state, against your expressed wishes, dictate to you the morals and values your
children are to accept by bending to special interest groups and
allowing these groups to instruct your children in their beliefs?
Take away the
homosexuality for a moment and look at the issue from a
different angle. Consider your own opinion on the abortion
issue. What if the side that you disagree with under
the guise of tolerance performed cute skits before your children
against your wishes in an effort to impress upon your children
their views and acceptance of their position as the only correct
position? And what if you expressed in writing to the
school board that this wasn't appropriate and you did not want
your children to be exposed to this because it was against your
own principles and the values you raise your children by?
And what if some member of the school faculty decided that your
opinions were wrong and went ahead and brought in the pro or
anti group against your explicit wishes and required your
children to attend? You discovered this after the fact. This is
what happened, and even if you are pro-homosexuality, the issue
here is alarming.
|
In this case
it is the homosexual community pushing their agenda on children
too young to have the cognitive skills to differentiate cause
and effect. +The state of California has decided that it
has a responsibility to promote this lifestyle as
healthy and normal. By doing so, it has ignored the
expressed wishes of parents stating they do not want their
children being taught this because it is against their morals,
values and beliefs.
TOP
Why the Parents
are Concerned
Any parent
with children under fourteen should be acutely aware of what
groups and messages are being presented to their children.
Children do not develop critical thinking skills until age
fourteen. This is one reason why children that kill or
perform violent acts are not prosecuted as adults.
|
|
|
Their minds do not have
the ability to fully comprehend the ramifications of their
actions. They cannot reason like adults and they cannot question
like adults. This makes children's minds vulnerable and
this is the reason special interests want access to small
children.
Create a generation preconditioned to your way of thinking and
eventually you'll have a population ready to abide by your
wishes. What better way than to reach children than
through entertainment? What better way to mold a future
society to your agenda than to impress them before they have the
ability to comprehend cause and effect, sexuality and the adult
issues involved?
TOP
Bottom line.
Every person on this
planet wants to be accepted for who they are and be told that
whatever they do is good. As a society, we've catered to emotion
rather than principles and we bend with the discussions deemed
politically correct. Politically correct does not equate with
morality, justice or what is intrinsically right. It
equates with what society is lead to believe by peer pressure or
provocative influencers capitalizing on the squeaky wheel
syndrome. TOP
Many of the problems we
face as a nation are the direct result of apathetic parents and
a loss of influence and guidance by these parents in their
children's lives. The Novato parents have
taken an active interest in raising their children and the state
is now undermining their ability to raise their children. These are not religious right-wingers,
zealots or gay-bashers. They are not prejudice,
close-minded or irrational. They are parents who want to
raise their children according to a value system and morality
they believe.
|
|
|
Freedom of religion is a
fundamental right in the United States, and like it or not, the
Bible does direct Christians to observe and acknowledge
homosexual behavior and premarital sex (homosexual or
heterosexual) as wrong. Christianity teaches to hate the
sin but love the sinner. Christianity teaches that we are
all sinners to varying degrees and that individual commandments
do not carry more weight than others. Break one
commandment and it is equivalent in God's eyes to any other
commandment. The Bible makes no distinction.
The state, by not adhering to
the parent's
expressed wishes, is interfering with their right to observe and
practice their religion and raise their
children as they see fit. In all likelihood they would
have the same issues if Planned Parenthood or Playboy came in to
teach their young children about heterosexuality against their
wishes or promoted premarital sex to seven year olds.
|
|
Regardless of your
feelings about homosexuality, the issue here is your rights as a
parent in raising your children and quelling the tide of special
interests groups that want to educate your children to their
belief system. Even if homosexuality isn't the issue you
disagree with, one day you may be forced upon by one you do.
On that day, what will be your recourse?
TOP
|
Recent
examples in the media used by special interests to increase
access to children and change public opinion:
From an IVY League School:
A
story this week by the Newhouse News Service noted that a
handful of academics at mainstream universities are arguing in
academic journals, books and online that at least some sex
between adults and children should be acceptable, especially
when children consent to it.
Posted: March 29, 2002, 1:00 a.m. Eastern, By Art Moore:
Article: BRAVE
NEW SCHOOLS
Pedophile advocate featured
at university
Penn State's latest controversial event includes sadomasochist
author.
TOP
"Children are the last bastion of
the old sexual morality," wrote one of the trailblazers for this
view, Harris Mirkin, an associate professor of political science
at the University of Missouri-Kansas City.
Social conservatives aware of
efforts to legitimize adult-child sex have publicly expressed
horror. On his radio show broadcast to hundreds of Christian
stations, psychologist and author James Dobson said the intent
is to "make boys accessible" to men.
Mark
O'Keefe, Newhouse News Service, Mar 26 2002
TOP
|
|
|
|
|
Comments?
Tell Us What
You Think!
The Novato School District Case Summary:
September 2000 the parents of seven Novato children had filed school
"opt- out" forms allowing their children to be excused from any
classes on family life and other issues that might conflict with
their religious training and beliefs. |
|
Parents
state they received no prior written notice of the presentation of
Cooties.
|
School
officials stated after the assemblies that the opt-out forms were
"missing."
|
|
The Parents formed a group called Citizens for Parental Rights
and are represented by lawyers from Pacific Justice
Institute
|
Assembly
Bill 537
The California Student Safety and Violence Prevention Act of
2000.
This bill changed California's education code by adding
sexual orientation and gender to the nondiscrimination policy. The bill covers dis-crimination and harassment in the state's
public schools and any school receiving state funding.
|
|
Bay
Area Discovery Museum of Sausalito
promoted the program into the school. The museum is devoted to
"The bridging of cultures ... and where diverse families and children
learn from one another." |
|
Prior to performing in Marin County, the Theatrical Troop,
Fringe Benefits performed Cooties for the LA Unified
School District in the fall of 2000. No objections by LA Parents
currently appear in public records.
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
