We get emails from Focus on the Family, the following is the latest edition. I thought that it was very interesting, but couldn't ultimately come to a decision about how I feel about it. Please comment!
Dear Friends,
In the past few days, the intolerant nature of the homosexual agenda has been on open display. This time that intolerance has been exposed for what it is by one of our Focus on the Family® events.
Orchestrated Attempt to Undermine Our Efforts
We are hosting a "Love Won Out" conference Saturday in Grand Rapids, MI., to help Christians
in that area manage the issue of homosexuality in
a Christ-like manner. Over the last 10 years, these conferences have equipped thousands of Christians to become voices of God's love and liberty to homosexuals.
As often happens wherever these conferences are held, gay activists spare no invective as they denounce the idea that Christ can help someone struggle free of unwanted homosexuality. Just two days before our conference, Grand Valley State University in Grand Rapids hosted a seminar entitled, "Religion and Homophobia: Spiritual Violence in our Community." (Doesn't that sound tolerant?). The conference was stacked with gay activist speakers, and it was held under the auspices of--are you ready for this?--the Vice President of Inclusion and Equity, Dr. Jeanne Arnold. So we phoned Dr. Arnold and we asked to have one of our speakers included in her conference.
I bet you can guess how the "Vice President for Inclusion and Equity" responded to our request to be included! For more on this latest tribute to the intolerance of the homosexual agenda, watch the newest Focus Action Update video.
The Goal: Imposing Their Agenda And Suppressing Opposing Ideas
It's becoming more and more obvious that the homosexual agenda isn't really about tolerance after all. It's about imposing a radical agenda on our society and using nasty rhetoric and the force of law to suppress opinions that oppose their agenda. Anyone who dares to stand for Biblical notions of sexuality will face the intolerance of homosexual activism.
Well, we will stand! And I am encouraged that you are standing with us. Your prayers and your financial support are a great encouragement to our team. May God richly bless you as you bless our nation by the stand you are taking.
For faith and family,
Tom Minnery
Senior Vice President, Government & Public Policy
I mostly just find it depressing and stressful, largely because I don't like conflict, and it's especially distressing to me when two sides can't LISTEN to each other. It's like there's no hope of understanding.
ReplyDeleteBased on my limited knowledge, it seems like the opposing conference at Grand Valley State University didn't understand what the Love Won Out conference was about. They are Christians teaching people to LOVE homosexuals, and offering help to those who WANT to overcome same sex attraction. It's hard to see how that's offensive.
Except for if you think anyone holding a different opinion from you is a threat to your personhood. If you think no aspects of a person's life can be examined by anyone, to evaluate what makes a better life. That everyone must be affirmed in all their decisions, or you are disrespecting who they fundamentally are.
The very notion of "overcoming" SSA is offensive to them, because it causes too much inner turmoil and makes people question who they are (it doesn't matter that the conference is for those who WANT that change).
Anyway, they organize an opposing conference. Probably with a misconstrued idea of what Love Won Out is actually about. But they want to defend their rights to do whatever they want and be who they are.
I understand the irony of the "inclusion and equity" department being involved, and not allowing an opposing speaker. But seriously, this is an opposing event, with this specific purpose (not primarily the broad stated purpose of the department), so why would they allow someone from Love Won Out to speak there? As far as they are concerned, the two sides of the discussion are being held at two separate places in town. They are the ones providing the alternate view.
I don't really enjoy political hype that reduces issues to a single sensationalized sentence. "It's becoming more and more obvious that the homosexual agenda isn't really about tolerance after all. It's about imposing a radical agenda on our society and using nasty rhetoric and the force of law to suppress opinions that oppose their agenda."
Ok sort of, but I don't really think that's how they see themselves (maybe a few?). I think it's more about being able to do what they want to with no interference and no one to tell them they're wrong.
It comes down to our different definitions of tolerance...
My rant has lost steam. Here's some links:
Love Won Out conference
News Article
And topically (but not specifically) related:
Censorship in Britain
I think the phrase "homosexual agenda" is a strange term. Is there one Christian agenda? I doubt it, seeing as how Christian can have tons of different world views woven into their faith, and there are plenty of Christians who think nothing is wrong with homosexuality. I'm sure there are people who would argue that those folks aren't exactly following Christ, but anyway...
ReplyDeleteI do agree, however, that there seems to be a determined effort on the part of gay, lesbian, and transgendered folks to not only gain equal rights, but to gain some sort of degree of normality in the culture and will stop of nothing short of an amendment to the Constitution stating homosexuality is good, right, and normal. That's what the quest for homosexual marriage is all about.
I'm normally of the camp that government should stay out of people's lives as much as possible, and certainly not try to enforce one form of religion or another. However, government has been involved in marriage since the beginning of government. Two parent man and woman households with children are a stabilizing factor in their neighborhoods and in the country in general. Parents have more of a stake in safe, drug-free, crime-free cities and towns.
If gays were only interested in equal rights, they would have perfectly satisfied with civil unions. They want more, and will not stop until they get it. Thankfully, their tactics are earning the ire of middle America and I'm not certain people will stand much longer for being bullied. Not that I think violence will.should follow, but an end to this constant push to accept their way of life and wolrd view.