Will Ex-Gays Bring Down “Big Sodomy”?

Kindly refer to the article by Donald Hank at WorldNetDaily entitled “Will Ex-Gays Bring Down ‘Big Sodomy’?”:


Only a few hours after the article was run, the email started pouring in, some favorable, some the usual ones accusing the writer of being “un-christian,” “angry,” “stupid”, etc.
One lady said the column was “all the buzz” and said she had received alerts from several groups and individuals independently of each other!
If there is time, we will share the “fan” mail with you here and in the comments section to this entry.

The Right to Alert Against homosexuality: for How Long?

The right to alert against homosexuality: for how long?


Julio Severo


Freedom of speech entitles us to say that drugs are harmful. Although human laws decriminalize drugs, those concerned about the health of young people will continue warning them of their dangers.


When tobacco use was cool and trendy, it was fashionable in the upper classes and entertainers to smoke a cigarette openly, but some churches made an effort to help those imprisoned in tobacco addiction. The value of measures to discourage smoking has only recently been recognized, but many forget that the banner against tobacco had already been raised in many churches a long time ago. I remember that I myself used to distribute, in my teen years, evangelistic tracts against tobacco, when there was no state effort against that addiction. As ever, the secular forces, especially the State, always arrive late.


Therefore, many decades before government efforts against smoking, ministers and churches were alerting people to the danger. Church members were strongly advised to abandon that addiction.


Deliverance services aimed at people in need of solution and restoration in problems as alcohol, cigarette, adultery, drugs, homosexuality, etc. In the deliverance services of a Baptist church, my own mother was healed from a serious disease and delivered from her smoking addiction.


No cigarettes or alcohol manufacturer has ever intimidated, sued or persecuted any evangelical church for its radical positions against those addictions. No motel or condom manufacturer has ever intimidated, sued or persecuted any evangelical church for its radical positions against sex outside of marriage. No television network or publisher has ever intimidated, sued or persecuted any evangelical church for its radical positions against immoral soap operas and pornographic magazines.


Yet, the homosexuality promoters, advocates, propagandists and sympathizers brazenly threaten, with total state support, to do what no cigarettes, alcohol, immoral soap operas, condoms and pornographic magazine manufacturers have never done against Christ’s followers and their churches. They want nothing less than total and unrestricted freedom for the homosexual sin.


Christ’s followers are in the vanguard of the most important ethical and social issues and they have good reasons to educate their congregations and the general public regarding each one of those issues. In the Bible, everything that damages the human body is seen as harmful, because the body is the temple of the Holy Spirit. And as Christ’s followers and citizens, we have all right and freedom to point out evils and addictions, and also the solution — which is in Jesus Christ, as the Gospel presents.


Jesus Christ came to the world to save sinners and deliver them from their sins. Without that essential truth, the Gospel is turned into a distortion of God’s grace, where Christ would be presented just as a good man or a good Master. But, for Christians, he is Savior, because only he can save human beings completely from oppressions and illusions that imprison the heart.


Christ’s followers are free, whether the secular State accepts or not, to say that Christ delivers men from adultery, pornography, drugs, alcoholism, cigarette, homosexuality, etc., and to establish religious services, groups and healing centers for each one of those sins. They have every right to say that those choices, although consecrated in law, are wicked and destructive. And the public is entitled to hear that message


Even though the Bible doesn’t condemn cigarettes directly, the opposition of Christians is based on the belief that our body is the temple of the Holy Spirit. And the current government opposition to the tobacco addiction just confirms that Christians are ahead the State in important moral and ethical issues.


With good biblical, medical, psychological and social reasons, Christ’s true followers believe and teach that homosexuality is sin, perversion and abnormal. They have always believed and taught this way.  However, the same government that has arrived late in responding to other threats to public moral, corporal, mental and spiritual health now creates hindrances to Christ’s followers that are committed to alert the public to serious threats to health.


Continuing in a long track of initiatives, programs and bills that combat those that reject the homosexual sin, the Lula administration, in one more hostile gesture against the eternal values of the Bible, is manifesting itself against an evangelical campaign of information on homosexuality.


VINACC (Portuguese acronym for National Vision for Christian Conscience), an evangelical association based on Campina Grande, Paraiba, Brazil, had begun a June campaign to alert the population on the risks of an anti-homophobia bill in the Brazilian Congress, using billboards, addressing a subject that has been an obsession in the society, government and media: homosexuality. The VINACC billboards just said: “Homosexuality: And God made male and female and he saw it was good”. Many homosexual groups protested, and the federal government issued an official declaration condemning the VINACC campaign. The same government that uses the excuse of the secular State to block the inclusion of the Christian values in the public-square issues now issues an official declaration condemning an evangelical campaign that only states that  homosexuality is not God’s ideal for human beings. And the campaign did not even refer to homosexuality as a sin!


Newspapers and TV news services throughout Brazil reported the campaign. Then a local female judge ordered VINACC to remove its billboards, to not have its public meeting in defense of family, and to remove its manifesto from the VINACC website. VINACC complied.


According to its detractors, VINACC billboards, the public demonstration and the online manifesto promote homofobia. In a TV interview, the president of the NGO National Network of People Living with HIV/AIDS said that the federal Ministry of Health sent them message directing them to take legal measures regarding the case. The Ministry of Health, the judge and the homosexual groups accused the campaign of violating human rights and offending the Brazilian Constitution!


The VINACC campaign aimed to inform the society of the perils of an anti-homophobia bill in the Brazilian Congress (See the article The criminalization of homophobia in Brazil and the Christian churches: lastdayswatchman.blogspot.com/ lang=EN-US style=”FONT-SIZE: 15pt; FONT-FAMILY: Georgia”>2007/03/criminalization-of-homophobia-in-brazil.html). Homosexual militants and state authorities in Brazil assure us that its approval will not criminalize Biblical opposition to homosexuality. Yet, the Bible-based VINACC campaign in billboards and Internet was forbidden for crime of “homophobia”. Furthermore, a Brazilian minister has been recently sued for the same reason (http://lastdayswatchman.blogspot.com/2007/06/brazilian-minister-persecuted-for.html)



Saint Karl

It is vital to our civilization to avoid the snares of the religious Left

By Donald Hank

I recently saw an article prophesying that the failures of the present administration will tarnish the image of Christianity because of its unwillingness to follow the Constitution in areas such as human rights, education and border security, and its fuzzy notion of Christianity being compatible with Islam.

Although I take this prophecy very seriously, I also believe Americans can avoid falling into this trap if we learn some basic facts about the Left, particularly the fact that it is 100% fake 100% of the time, no exceptions, and that includes the “Christian” Left. I say that with full confidence as a former leftist insider.

Therefore I believe one of the chief mechanisms that Satan will use, and has used, to subvert Christianity will be “Christian” Left.

That is why I am always alert to the ways and means by which the “Christian” left operates and it is why I first reported on the shenanigans of a group operating out of the first Baptist Church of Charleston South Carolina under the leadership of Dr. Mitch Carnell, who bills himself as a communications expert and has twice run press releases in Christian Newswire pushing the policy whereby Christians are to say nice things about each other.  In my last column, I demonstrate that this niceness idea is not intended to apply to those who disagree with the Left. It is in fact camouflage for subversion of the faith.

I challenged Mitch to a debate of sorts by e-mail and in his responses—actually non-responses—he kept repeating the mantra that Christians need to respect each other and that we share the common goal of leading people to Christ.
In his last e-mail, he also said neither he nor I was right.  We just had different viewpoints.

In these two assertions lies the Christian Left’s insidious strategic formula, as outlined by my friend and colleague Olavo De Carvalho in a recent column entitled How to Debate with Leftists, to whit (I have extrapolated this to the Christian left):

1—Trap the opponent into following the leftist’s rules, namely mandatory acceptance of the proposition that both sides, including the left, are sincere Christians,
2—Pay lip service to the idea of “leading people to Christ” but without defining what that means,
3—When you can no longer win on logical grounds, state that neither opponent is wrong so as to prematurely terminate the debate and confuse the opponent.

The unwary traditional Christian opponent who falls into this trap is quickly ensnared, can hardly escape and suffers a crisis of faith.  After all, if it were true that the leftist opponent were just a sincere Christian with a different viewpoint, then it would be ungracious to keep arguing. Maybe God is on the side of the Left? And the orthodox Christian knows that we are to “go out into the world and preach the gospel” so he warms up to the sneaky leftist on that point as well. Not only that, as the leftist knows, conservative Christians are bound to some extent by the dictum “judge not that ye be not judged” and he is counting on this to restrain the orthodox Christian from assaulting frontally.

But the assumption that the “Christian” leftist bears any resemblance beyond the cosmetic to a traditional Christian is patently fallacious. For unlike traditional Christianity, which starts with God’s view of the universe and applies it to man, the Christian left starts with Marx’s view of the universe, rewrites the Bible to fit and forces this pap down the hapless victim’s throat while reminding him “we’re both Christians.”  This, of course, cannot be reconciled with Christ’s teachings.  It in fact jibes squarely with the parable of the thief in the sheepfold. Further, woe unto the conservative who accepts at face value the suggestion that the leftist who “wins someone to Christ” is in fact teaching that Christ is the way, the truth and the life and that no man cometh unto the Father but through me. The Left does not emphasize spiritual salvation because it secretly disdains the idea, and it leaves ample latitude for all kinds of interpretations of the Bible except traditional ones. It emphasizes instead stamping out hunger and disease through government intervention, relegating soul salvation to the realm of optional mysticism. To the Left, “winning someone to Christ” reduces in principle to teaching people to vote for liberal Democrats.

Thus, upon this debate between the Left and the Orthodox hinges nothing less than the future of Christendom.

For if Christians concede, absurdly, that neither the Left nor the orthodox are wrong, then any moral code is valid (including Marxism) and we fall into moral relativism, a code that is not only non-Christian, but is precisely pre-Christian, pre-Judaic, even pre-Hammurabic.  To accept this non-code is to negate all of Judeo-Christian culture and civilization and in fact the notion of civilization per se. 

Christ without a moral code is not Christ.  Without “go and sin no more,” there is no salvation because Christ died to cover the sins of sincere individuals desirous of escaping sin, not to camouflage ongoing sins of the unrepentant.

Now it is grotesquely ironic that a person should be a church leader, claiming to be an expert in communication and yet subscribe to moral relativism (all of us are right), especially of the leftwing variety.

This is so because the only purpose of communication can be the transmission of useful ideas and information.  If the argument, idea or information is irrelevant, it is not worth communicating and is tantamount to mere background noise in the phone line.  The idea “we’re both right” is a totally useless and irrelevant conclusion because it leaves both interlocutors at exactly the same place as before the transmission took place, adding nothing new to the dialogue that could in any way be construed as useful to either party.

Teaching people how to communicate this useless conclusion is like teaching people how to drive an empty truck, i.e., one with no payload, and in fact, teaching them that they should never attempt to transport a payload of any kind — just drive an empty truck.

No one would sign up for such a vocational course because no employer in the transport business would hire such a driver.

Yet presumably, people sign up for Mitch’s communication course only to be told that all communication must end up with each interlocutor admitting that his own message (payload) is so useless that the recipient of his message need not change his way of thinking in any way. 

In other words:
I’m okay, you’re okay, or rather, I’m a loser, you’re a loser.  Sorry I bothered to waste so much of your time since my idea is no better than yours.

Next time we’ll just do a couple of bong hits, sing Kumbaya and go home.

But what is happening behind the mask is that the leftist is gradually and subtly separating the orthodox Christian from his core beliefs while holding tightly to his own.  The left wins, the Biblical Christian loses.

Yet beyond this microdrama, a real God, not the leftist construct of the deity or the spirit of Karl Marx, wrestles with evil, and at the very end of all the vain struggling, the clever charlatan and his Father fall into the ultimate, eternal trap of their own choosing. And there they are reunited at last with their patron saint Karl.

I want to thank my friend Brazilian philosopher Olavo De Carvalho, a man with rare insight into the international revolutionary movement, for alerting me to the pitfalls of debating with the left and for teaching me how to defeat the charlatans by exposing their cunning schemes, giving no quarter and showing no mercy.

Donald Hank is a technical translator and staff writer for Laigle’s Forum.

Contact the author: don@zoilandonsplace.com