I will state outright that I have written posts similar to this with similar information and it has not sat well with people who do not believe in the Inerrancy of Scripture. So if you do not believe the Bible is the infallible word of God, then you should probably stop reading now because what follows will only anger you. I believe what follows touches a raw nerve because of how close it comes to the "accusation" that there is a concerted and deliberate "gay agenda". The fact is that all the cited academic evidence in this post points to the fact that there is indeed an agenda or at least a premeditated plan. It is an agenda that is intent on a forced acceptance of "alternate lifestyles". The methodologies used to do this are based on normalization and acceptance of immoral behaviors, redefining language or a deconstruction of it.
Contrary to
the idea that I am trying to single out homosexuality from other sins and
demonize it, one of the main underlying threads that will work its way through
this series and form in my synopsis/conclusion is that homosexuality is indeed
just like other sins (especially sexual ones) and should not be looked at any
differently (1 Corinthians 6). I actually will go through great pains to show that I am
not deliberately singling out homosexuality in this series or demonizing it,
merely accentuating how it is become a cultural juggernaut by force of its own will (or imposition).
Conversely, I will inevitably show the fact that homosexuality and proponents
of it are "singling themselves out" by forceful if not outright
militant behavior by forcing themselves on the culture and subsequently the
church. Tolerating the sin(s) in the culture is now not
enough, it has to be approved of (which many in the church are doing en masse).
Unlike adultery, to speak out against homosexuality is now becoming a cultural
taboo where speaking out against other sins is not (yet). So much so that the lex terrae (law of the land) is now
beginning to be shaped to prevent people from speaking negatively of
homosexuality in any form. To speak against this sin is now being framed as illegal in some
cases if not officially, definitely in a informal or de facto (default)
situation. It is the fact that it is being accepted into the church without
repentance is what makes this issue a theological problem and is primarily why
I write.
Based on
observations and studies of media like the Internet and television it has
become evident that the modern culture has become nurturing environment
for the acceptance of the sin of homosexuality as an “alternative lifestyle.”
So much so that the American Psychiatric Association gave in to cultural
pressure by eliminating homosexuality per se as a mental disorder and replaced
it with a “sexual orientation disturbance” section in the Diagnostic and
Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Version II (DSM-II) in December 1973
(Spitzer 380). There had been considerable controversy on whether or not
homosexuality should be classified as a mental disorder. In 1973 the Board of
Trustees of the American Psychiatric Association voted to eliminate
homosexuality and substitute a new category Sexual Orientation Disturbance.
The
rationale behind this move was that homosexuals were able to function socially
and occupationally with no impairment or disturbance nor did they manifest any
obvious signs of psychopathology, therefore it was reasoned that their
condition could not be viewed as a disorder (by medical definition). Furthermore, the definition of the
category used to diagnose homosexuality required that it be compared to a
normal sexuality to act as a known benchmark or norm. The benchmark previously
used for normal was heterosexuality. Because homosexuality was now considered
an independent functional norm and not a disorder, it no longer needed to be
compared to the heterosexuality and a deviation from it. Homosexuality had
therefore been totally reclassified as an acceptable sexual practice that did
not create social or occupational impairment (Spitzer 380).
It should
also be noted that these changes happened not long after/during the Gay
Liberation Front movements of the culture in the late 1960’s and early 1970’s
that were instigated by incidents like the Stonewall Riots of 1969 in New York
City. The motives behind the Gay Liberation Front are clear spelled out in the
Gay Liberation Front: Manifesto. The manifesto is a document reciting instances
within the culture that they claim have supposedly oppressed homosexuals. Within this
manifesto are blatant statements about how organizations like the church and
psychiatric community in general are hostile towards homosexuality and need correction.
It follows
that if homosexuals wish to be liberated from this societal
"oppression", it was/is the stated long term aim of Gay Liberation
to…
“…rid
society of the gender-role system which is at the root of our oppression. This
can only be achieved by eliminating the social pressures on men and women to
conform to narrowly defined gender roles.” (Halsall-Gay Liberation Front:
Manifesto)
They also
stated a list of demands and drew up what amounts to a campaign to achieve the
ends stated within their manifesto. It includes actions such as a desire…
“…that
psychiatrists stop treating homosexuality as though it were a sickness, thereby
giving gay people senseless guilt complexes.” (Halsall-Gay Liberation Front:
Manifesto)
-And-
“…that all
discrimination against gay people, male and female, by the law, by employers,
and by society at large, should end.” (Halsall-Gay Liberation Front: Manifesto)
-And-
“...that sex
education in schools stop being exclusively heterosexual” (Halsall-Gay
Liberation Front: Manifesto)
It is quite
possible that some of these social pressures would be not only be brought to
bear on the church but also the psychiatric establishment (noted above) and
even the educational system which gay people have clearly stated has oppressed
them in some manner. It is not hard to conclude that some of the reasoning
behind removing homosexuality from psychiatric diagnostic manuals finds some of
its impetus in the culture and the homosexual community and pressure that was
brought to bear on the medical establishment in the decade before and after its
decision to change in 1973.
Subsequent
editions of the DSM like the DSM-IV have since completely discarded what were
considered “sexual orientation disturbances” that had previously been in the
DSM-III (1986) version (Spitzer 380). The most recent version DSM-IV is utterly
devoid of reference to homosexuality as a disorder so I have not even cited it
because I have no purpose for doing so. The “sexual orientation disturbance”
section in the DSM-III contained the last known mention of homosexuality as a
mental disorder (Spitzer-Appendix C).
Without getting into the nuances of why, it will suffice to say that this is documented systemic evidence that the modern culture of the last few generations is leaning away from considering homosexuality a sexual psychological/physical anomaly or as a Christian would say: a sexual immorality or sin. Sin which like all others sin will invariably keep us from holiness and the Kingdom of God.
Without getting into the nuances of why, it will suffice to say that this is documented systemic evidence that the modern culture of the last few generations is leaning away from considering homosexuality a sexual psychological/physical anomaly or as a Christian would say: a sexual immorality or sin. Sin which like all others sin will invariably keep us from holiness and the Kingdom of God.
1
Corinthians 6:9-11 ~ Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do
not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor
adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy,
nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And such
were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were
justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Intelligent Responses