Trans people deserve sympathy. It would be a tough life to not feel at home in the gender of your body – especially since mental health professionals dont seem to be able to solve the problem. Ive known a few people who have gone trans. One dressed as a woman for some years, before eventually re-aligning his presentation with his male body, though as a gay man.
Trans people seem to feature in the news when conflict arises about whether they should be entitled to use facilities intended for the gender that doesnt match their body. EG bathrooms. In the news at present is a school student who has a male body, but regards himself as a girl, and who wants to use female bathrooms at the school. In this case, the student hasnt had any sex change operations but isnt satisfied with unisex bathrooms. Many female students have protested in response. You would think that providing a unisex bathroom would have solved the problem.
In cases like this, some point out that if society is relaxed about trans bathroom use, any man could put on a dress, go into women’s bathrooms and force himself on innocent victims. Others dismiss this as fear mongering. But guess what – there has been at least one case of a man in a dress who sexually violated women. The one Im thinking of, is Christopher Hambrook –
Caleb Kaltenbach, evangelical minister, and son of two gay parents. Gay parents who are now Christians. I know, it sounds too good to be true! But according to this, it is true …
It’s referenced elsewhere too.
Reminds me a little of Katy Faust.
One of the most annoying pieces of rhetoric about gay marriage, is the claim that it doesn’t affect straight people. It’s annoying because it’s said so frequently, and because it’s so incorrect. Even gay people have admitted this. Wouldn’t it be nice if gay people could have gay marriages without negatively impacting others, and Christians could practise their faith without negatively impacting others. But this the real world, and unfortunately, each of us tends to affect others.
After the US Supreme Court decision on gay marriage, millions of Facebook users around the world, changed their primary Facebook photo to display rainbow colours. A gay friend of mine badgered me to do likewise. You have heard the rhetoric. He said it was part of supporting equality. He said I should support civil rights. He just couldn’t accept that I didn’t want a rainbow profile photo. To him, not having one, was wrong. It was like peer pressure back in high school, and I felt the friendship strain! So yes, in a somewhat minor way, gay marriage is affecting me already, and Im not liking it.
Controversy erupted in certain quarters recently, when the media reported that the president of Spokain chapter of the NAACP, who presents as a black woman, is genetically simply white. It was another example of the extremism you find in academic quarters, and it raised some interesting questions –
In the wake of the US supreme court’s problematic judgement on gay marriage, some pundits have been proudly citing one particular section of the judgment, EG as repeated here –
“No union is more profound than marriage, for it embodies the highest ideals of love, fidelity, devotion, sacrifice, and family. … It would misunderstand these men and women to say they disrespect the idea of marriage. Their plea is that they do respect it, respect it so deeply that they seek to find its fulfillment for themselves. …”
But this cuts to the core of why some feel that gay unions should not be referred to as ‘marriage’. Specifically, because half the time, gay relationships don’t embody “the highest ideals of love, fidelity, devotion, sacrifice, and family”, because half the time they are not monogamous.
Below is a capture of an (unexpanded) post on Facebook. Would you agree that it claims that a pastor wants gays killed? I think so. The image below does not show the expanded version of the Facebook post, but the full wording only has a longer response, and no further content from the original pastor. But did the pastor actually say that he wants gays killed?
So what is this Facebook post based on? Well, in August last year, Brainerd Baptist Church reportedly broadcast a sermon on homosexuality. We know this because the following month, Raw Story published a far-left report on it, and included a Youtube recording of the sermon. Unfortunately the link to the Youtube recording, is no longer active, so I don’t know the entire contents of the sermon. But I can see from the Facebook page of the church, that members recommended that critics watch the whole sermon, and that they deny the pastor was advocating killing gays. I can also see by Googling, that this church is so big, that they have several pastors, several campuses and their own TV broadcast. Do churches of this size advocate killing people? No. Never the less, Raw Story titled their report –
TN pastor vows not to ‘repent’ for homophobia: God says gays ‘must be put to death’
The report stated in part –
After spending about 20 minutes recounting the perils of homosexuality throughout history, Gallaty asserted that the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed by God because of gay sex.
“God said that the sins of the people had infected the very land in which they live,” he explained. “So what happens to people who engage in this activity, this sexual immoral activity? Go to Leviticus 20, God gives us the punishment for engaging in these sins… ‘If a man sleeps with a man as with a woman, they have both committed a detestable thing. They must be put to death. And their blood is on their own hands.’”
So as your average Biblically-literate Christian would agree, the pastor was obviously reading from the Old Testament of the Bible (Leviticus 20) and quoting where it said that homosexual offenders must be put to death, and was exploring why the Bible says the towns of Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed. Saying that gays must be put to death, were not the pastors own words. For the leftist Raw Story, such facts or nuance were not important to whoever wrote that headline. They saw an opportunity to demonise Christians in the headline, and they weren’t going to waste it.
Then on the same day, a Patheos blogger cited the Raw Story report, writing about it giving his post much the same title and angle as was used by Raw Story. Almost a year later, in June 2015, a gay church posted a link to the Patheos report, on their Facebook page. Another pastor commented on that Facebook posting. 20 minutes later, that pastor had posted the above comments and pictures about this, on his own church Facebook page. HOWEVER, this Facebook post omitted the original quote that Raw Story provided, which illustrated (however obscure it was) that the pastor was simply quoting the Bible, and that killing people was not his point.