Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for June 27th, 2011

Students identifying themselves as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or queer (LGBTQ)  are asking conservative, evangelical colleges to change policies and theology to reflect their “sexuality” and behavioral choices.

In his article for CitizenLink (6-13-11), Jeff Johnston notes that LGBTQ students are rallying on the campuses of Cedarville University, Hope College, Seattle Pacific University, Wheaton College, and more.  The Wheaton LGBTQ website states, “We do not believe there is anything wrong with being gay.  We don’t just believe otherwise, we live happily, and even faithfully, otherwise.”

The Cedarville group concurs, “Most of us still identify as Christian and are joined in our belief that God made us gay and that being gay is not a sin.  Instead of a burden or a struggle, we see our and everyone’s sexuality as a gift.”

Once again, I take issue with God “making people to be homosexual.”  Does a loving God create a person who can’t “fit” together with another to procreate and bring new life into the world?  Does a loving God sit in heaven and laugh when homosexual behavior produces STDs, anal cancer, and HIV/AIDS?

Johnston is correct.  “To affirm homosexuality and transgenderism takes some major Scripture twisting.”  Evangelical colleges and universities would have to change basic tenets of the Christian faith in order to embrace LGBTQ theology.  Johnston gives three examples:

  • Humanity is created male and female in the image of God.
  • God established marriage to bring into union a husband and wife and as the foundation for procreation and family.
  • The metaphor of husband and wife is the central biblical image that illustrates God’s deep passion for His people and Christ’s love for His Bride, the Church.

To affirm homosexual or transgender behavior is to ignore 5000 years of Judeo-Christian foundational teaching.  More, as Johnston states, it assaults the core features of what it means to be human.

Doubting God’s Word was the first — and still most troublesome — sin.  It ruins relationships, first with God and then with others.  God will not have us doubt His Word.  Tweak it.  Distort it.  But, He would have us use His Word to changes hearts and minds.  To treat even those who doubt His Word with kindness.

Read Full Post »

Thomas J. Vilsack is the former governor of Iowa.  My governor.  He drifted away from Iowa in a bubble of political correctness to land in the chair of U.S. Secretary of Agriculture.

Vilsack, apparently still in the bubble, is pushing for an intense brand of homosexual sensitivity training.  The Washington Times (6-19-2011) reports that this training would include a discussion that compares “heterosexism” to racism.  People who view marriage as being between only one man and one woman are guilty of “heterosexism.”

The “push for the training” is coming from Vilsack.  Why?  Does he have too much time on his hands?  Is there not enough work to be done with farm service agencies?  Food and nutrition?  The forest service?  Rural development?  Food safety and inspection?   What does agriculture have to do with homosexual sensitivity training?

Vilsack has launched a department-wide “cultural transformation” that includes a Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender (LGBT) Special Emphasis Program.  It appears that this program goes far beyond any training now being done by the Pentagon.  The USDA’s program is called “groundbreaking [and a] model for other agencies.”  It “delves more into gay issues and terminology.  It also justifies pro-homosexual political positions.”

Rowan Scarborough, writing for The Washington Times, explains that if the Obama administration accepts this kind of homosexual sensitivity training “it could mean more sessions for military service members already undergoing gay-sensitivity indoctrination.  Critics fear additional gay-oriented training would add an unnecessary burden for combat troops and encourage some to leave.”

Elaine Donnelly, who heads the Center for Military Readiness, has long opposed the repeal of the military’s ban on acknowledged gays.  She told the Washington Times, “There are disturbing implications for national defense in the USDA’s development of  a ‘groundbreaking’ training program that is to become a model for other federal agencies.”  She notes that “thousands of experienced troops, starting with chaplains and people of faith who do not support LGBT ideology and activism” would be driven out of the military.

Vilsack’s bubble of political correctness will burst.  Of that I am sure.  But, before that happens, I wonder.  How many people and institutions — including the family — will his “cultural transformation” affect?

Why is it more important for the USDA to be a leader in gender-identity diversity training than growing food to feed the world?

Read Full Post »