According to Wikipedia,
“GLAAD (formerly the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation) is a U.S. non-governmental media monitoring organisation founded by LGBT people in the media.”
And yes it’s quite apparent that defamation is off the radar at GLAAD these days. On their website, an article dated October 17 stated -
“Raymond Burke, … was interviewed by LifeSiteNews, an anti-LGBT news site …”
And then on October 20, they published another article online, with a title that began -
“Vatican scraps inclusion of LGBT people …”
So errr same-sex-attracted people cant work at the Vatican now? Or cant visit the Vatican? No, neither interpretation of the headline is correct. The level of inclusion of LGBT people by the Vatican is basically the same as it’s been for centuries. So long as LGBT people do not actually engage in homosexual sex, they are included much the same as anyone else. This is not the case for those wishing to enter the priesthood, but that is not what the GLAAD article was about.
No, what we have hear is GLAAD portraying traditional Christian/Catholic values in a particularly negative light. A misleadingly negative light, even. Both LifeSiteNews and the Vatican hold to standard Catholic teaching that while homosexual relations are sinful, gay people “must be accepted with respect and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.” The approach taken by GLAAD is particularly surprising given that their director of news describes himself as a Christian.
It’s an overstatement lacking in nuance, to describe LifeSiteNews as an anti-LGBT news site. And the same is the case for the claim that the Vatican does not include LGBT people.
The “Reverend” Frank Schaefer has been in the religious news a lot over recent years, primarily after he was defrocked, following him breaking denominational policy by officiating at the gay wedding of one of his sons. A recent news report states “he has no regrets” over the wedding. The article cites him -
“I did what I did based on my heart and my conscience,” Schaefer said, adding that he thought the church’s stand against gay marriage thrust his son into depression.
And the son was quite likely rather happy about getting married, although he reportedly later divorced. But was the church responsible for his son’s depression? I dont know for sure. But I do know that on the day I read this article, I read another (here), written by a gay activist journalist, that was remarkably frank in portraying some gay lives as depressing irrespective of church influence. And I know that there are many other reasons for depression in gay people. Lets not make the church a scapegoat.
According to media reports such the one below, a gay rights activist is raising $150,000 to pay the fine of a Christian couple who were prosecuted for taking a stand against same-sex marriage. The activist says he is doing this as an act of love.
Some gay activists have objected (see photo, right).
And some Christians have sneered in response, commenting that the activist is unrepentant over homosexuality and is still going to hell. But I wonder if the case is as clear as they imply. Matthew 22:34-40 states;
Pharisees got together. One of them, an expert in the law, tested Jesus with this question: “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”
Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”
I dont think the donating gay activist can be sure of his salvation. But who is more closely following that second commandment? The gay activist, or the person sneering at him even in the midst of his extraordinary generosity?
Make of that, what you will.
The leaders of the gay marriage movement within broad Christendom are big on getting their message out. They write books, they write articles, they give presentations. But they dont debate much. One of the bigger names in this area, is Justin Lee, author of the book Torn. Lee has been invited to debate those who disagree with him, but he has been known to turn the invitation down. He has claimed that he cant debate the topic, because his organisation, GCN, is home to some gays who believe that homosexual sex is sinful, AND is home to other gays who believe it’s not. So Lee says he cant take sides.
But what seems inconsistent to me, is that he does take sides. In the book Torn, he depicts gay marriage as not necessarily being sinful. And on Facebook, he’s inferred that he’s proud to be part of the drive towards gay marriage.
So when he claims he cant debate, is that just an excuse to cover fear that his ideology will be exposed as full of holes?
A recent article in in the New York Times about pedophilia, is alarming for several reasons. It suggests that 1% of males may have a sexual inclination towards children. It also references research findings that support the idea that pedophilia may have neurological origins. More here:
“mischaracterisations and lies”