Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Monday, July 24, 2006
Mike Adams :: Townhall.com Columnist
Three men and a baby
by Mike Adams
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


Dear Christopher:I appreciate your recent email characterizing me as a “sick, twisted, homophobic, right-wing, piece of slime.” Compared with most of the homosexual hate mail I receive on an almost daily basis, yours was really quite articulate and civil. As such, it deserves a lengthy response.

After your initial string of epithets, you outlined an argument against my attitude towards the homosexual lifestyle. Your argument enumerated several assumptions and positions I hear in many letters from gay readers.

First of all, you argue that homosexuality is genetic, not learned. Since these sexual urges are “natural,” they are also “God-given” and, therefore, you say, should be acted upon. And, since I am critical of homosexuality, you assert that I am interfering with God’s will. Finally, since Jesus never explicitly criticized homosexuality, you conclude that I am “un-Christian” to do so.

The bulk of your argument can be discredited by considering the following true story that was told to me just a few weeks ago:

A 43 year old businessman was tired of working seventy hours a week and enjoying virtually no social life – especially since he was still a bachelor. So he decided to invite a couple of his neighbors to put aside their yard work and spend a Saturday at the beach throwing back beers and taking in the sun. Somehow, the neighbors both convinced their wives to let them go for the day.

By late morning, the beaches were filling up with girls in bikinis and the three musketeers were rating each one as she passed by. Just before noon, the bachelor saw a tanned blond in sunglasses who appeared to top them all. She was about 5’3”, maybe 110 pounds, and must have worn a size “D” cup. Without hesitation, he tapped one of his friends on the shoulder and said “Perfect 10! Kind of makes me want to go back to college.” Both of his friends soon lifted a thumb in concurrence with the judgment.

But then, something funny - funny “strange,” not funny “ha ha” - happened. As the tanned young blond approached, the businessman recognized the girl. She lived just down the street in his neighborhood and attended a local middle school. In fact, she was only in the eighth grade. As soon as he did the math and realized she was around 13 years old, he felt a sickness deep inside his stomach.

A few moments later, one of his married friends also recognized the girl as his 13 year old neighbor. He felt a similar sickness in his stomach. But neither of the first two guys felt as nauseated as the third. Within a few moments, he recognized the girl as his 13 year old daughter.

The question I have for you, Christopher, is whether you consider the sexual urges of these three men to be “natural”? And, if so, would you also consider them to be “God-given.” Should any of these three men act upon these urges simply because they came about naturally? And, if one or more were to act upon the urge, should I keep my objections to myself to avoid interference with the will of God?

Perhaps you are of the opinion that it would be wrong for the businessman to have sex with the 13 year old because she is not a consenting adult. But, remember, Christopher, Jesus never spoke out against statutory rape in the New Testament.

But, fortunately, we do have a basis for preventing the second man from having sex with the 13 year old. Since he is married, the act would constitute adultery, which Jesus specifically condemned in the New Testament.

Of course, that would also provide us with a reason to condemn the third man if he were to have sex with his 13 year old daughter. But, according to your twisted logic, he would be no more culpable, morally speaking, than the second man if both were to act upon the sexual attraction to the 13 year old. Incest was never mentioned by Jesus in the New Testament so it has no relevance in your theology.

Having sinful sexual urges is not the thing that separates homosexuals from the rest of the population, Christopher. It is the arrogant tendency to characterize the sinful urge as the will of God, to yield to it, and to make it the center of his being that makes the average homosexual too self-absorbed for me to tolerate. And you are simply not let off the hook by Christ’s refusal to state the obvious.

I know this response was not what you wanted to hear, but I must respectfully ask you to keep your epithets to yourself. If you feel the urge to unleash another hostile email, please do me a favor and try to control the impulse. It is the very thing that separates the citizen from the savage.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Mike Adams is a criminology professor at the University of North Carolina Wilmington and author of Feminists Say the Darndest Things: A Politically Incorrect Professor Confronts "Womyn" On Campus.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to receive Mike Adams' column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Way to go Mike!
There seems to be no limit in the ways Homosexuals and Liberals, will use twisted logic in an attempt justify their agenda.

I think sexuality is a choice. If there are true genetic homosexuals they must be genetic freaks of nature. I feel sorry for them. Rare, but people are also born without arms, same thing. We must exercise tolerance, they deserve it.

If homosexuals are genetic they are freaks of nature. Rarely, but some are born without arms. Tolerance is called for here. Please don't stare!

Darwin
If homosexuality were genetic, AND if Darwin were correct, homosexuality would have ceased to exist many generations ago. The trait would have been bred out of existence.
The fact the homosexuality still exists, leaves one little to do but to assume one or both of the above conjectures is very false.

not genetic
The Bible states in Romans chapter 1 that homosexuality is wrong. Granted it wasn't Jesus himself who said it but it was inspired by God his Father.
Also, not to sound vulgar, if you look at homosexuality the entire lifestyle and sexual choice is a lie. The men are just putting it in a different orrifice and the women aren't doing anything to each other that men can't. Again, sorry to sound vulgar.
Also, I would like to see some of the people who are so vehemently hateful toward Mike and anyone else who believes homosexuality is wrong learn something about word meaning. A phobia is a fear.
Just because you believe something is wrong does not mean you fear it. I believe it is wrong for my kids to not do their chores but I do not fear the fact that they don't always do them.

Genetics - NO WAY!
Huh? is right. Genetics would explain AGAINST homosexuality. The only time I ever saw it occur in animals was when rats were serverly crowded. And then, I think it was misplaced because of all the pheremones floating around in the cage. (If you want, analyse that!)

Most of the homosexuals I have talked to admit to being seduced/raped by an older man when they were children. (Something else to analyse.)

As I have said, I only want homosexuals out of my face. I want them to keep it in their bedroom. I don't hear from anyone else about their sexual fantasies/exploits. Why do I HAVE to know that someone is a homosexual? If they do comprise 10% of the population, let them get their own channel and stay off mine! I don't want to see two women/men in a liplock!

I do profess to love the sinner, hate the sin. AND FIRMLY believe that homosexuality is psychologically WRONG, those who took it out of the APA handbook were bought off or something because of AIDS.

But is Homosexuality Genetic???
Tanabear, I'm a little offended by your opening statement: "If homosexuality is genetic, then why are identical twins usually discordant 80% of the time?" I happen to be an identical twin, and I'm neither discordant or homosexual, and neither is my twin. Furthermore, I have made the acquaintance od several other sets of identical twins, and although I never asked any of them to go to bed with me, even though some of them were men and some of them were women, I never found out for sure whether or not any of them were discordant or homosexual, but relying on my judge of character, I'd say that all of them were normal. By the way, did you make up the statistic about 80% of identical twins are discordant?

Genetic?
If it is genetic, does that make it OK? Are genetic diseases OK? Shouldn't we just accept the "alternate lifestyle" of someone with Parkinsons or autism? And as Ms Conservative pointed out, why are homosexuals the only ones who have to tell us every detail of the sex life?

Homosexual behavior is not genetic.
How could anyone believe that you can be genetically compelled to behave in a certain way? Your genes don't compel you to steal, to curse, to harm your father or mother, to commit adultry, to lie, to covet, to murder, to do unholy things on Sunday, or to behave homosexually.

homosexuality
homesexuality is not genetic. and homosexuality is not of God. It clearly states in the new testament that "homosexual offenders will not enter the kingdom of God." And it's not just in Christianity that homosexuality is forbidden. Almost all other religions forbid it, too. And like a couple people have said, Im tired of hearing about their sex lives.

homosexuality
homosexuality is a choice. Thats it. You choose to use the "hersey highway." lol... sorry thats funny.

I think Mike's point is that it doesn't even matter if it is genetic or not-everyone has desires that they shouldn't act on, and just because it's a "natural" urge doesn't mean it's good and you should follow it. it is "natural" to have an urge to turn to violence when angry, but we aren't "tolerant" of assault or murder- the negative effects of homosexuality just aren't as apparent, because there's no visible bruise, so a lot of people aren't willing to oppose it for fearing of appearing "intolerant"

Choices
Ok, so if Homosexuality is genetic so then to should be pedophilia (sp?), no?. Liberal judges in this country have sought to reform pedophiles so as not to burden our jails. Since Liberal judges seem to know all aren't they telling us something here.

Which one is it people?

Good column by Adams
Unfortunately, it's being ruined by a plethora of ignorant comments. Most of the comments consist of people denouncing those who think homosexuality is genetic, then asserting with equally flimsy evidence that it is a choice. Actually, JohnnyG simply writes, "I think sexuality is a choice." Well, great, I'm glad you think so, but what does that prove.

Whether or not it is a choice or genetic is not the issue. Dr. Adams realized that and wisely avoided touching it. Genetic, social and environmental factors all influence a person's sexuality. This does not, however, excuse a person's actions. Homosexual behavior is sinful regardless of why a person is a homosexual.

By thoughtlessly proclaiming homosexuality to be a choice, you put yourself in a vulnerable position. Essentially, you stake your opposition to homosexuality on the origin of the behavior. Not a good move. Don't concern yourself with its origin. If it's wrong (and it is), then it's wrong. Dr. Adams realized that, why couldn't all of you?

Beats the Heck out of me
I just don't know. Maybe this homosexuality stuff is genetic, sort of a response to looming lack of resources by having kids with a tendency not to procreate and thus use up said resources.
Be that as it may, it does not grant homosexuals the right to demand acceptance for a behavioral trait.
I do find it odd that the left thinks that homosexuality is a given, natural state that in no way should require a cure; but pedophilia is a disease and thusly can be fixed. They are both sexual preferences in my view so go figure.
I agree with Ms Conservative in that sex belongs in the bedroom and not in public and not in my face (or my children's), whatever the inclination.
Sex is not a bumper sticker. It is (or should be) a private affair between consenting adults, not a reason to have parades.
When what you do in between the sheets becomes your identity, I can only feel that it is a demand for attention/acceptance based on percieved victim status.
That, to me, is a psychosis.

Homosexuality is NOT genetic.
Simply stated, God would not condemn us for something we have no control over. It would be like condemning "all those with red hair" to an eternity of torment. No, homosexuality is a choice.

Also, we should never be afraid to be called "homophobic". What a ridiculous name that is! Have we forgotten the playgrounds of our youth? When one wanted someone else to do something they were resisting, one would call them "chicken", "coward", or, on the playgrounds I frequented, the ultimate "scaredy-cat". Normally that kind of dare would result in performing the stunt or whatever - just to prove your manhood. But no more.

"...when I became a man, I did away with childish things." I won't fall for that type of childish psychology any longer. "Homophobia" is a word created to get us to do what they want - and they will settle for nothing less than total support. Not me. Homosexuality is a sin and a perversion. Those suffering in homosexuality are there because they chose to be - and they're the only ones who can change it. Until then, I will fight the fight and keep the faith. God's Word cannot be changed or watered-down so that His children can be comfortable. To do so would invite ultimate destruction.



ouch!
Not much of a comeback for this one!



We are all born in sin
Homosexuality as genetic or not is irrelevant, spiritually speaking. For we are all born with sinful natures. But the fact that we are born in sin did not mitigate the need for the cross. No, it made the cross an absolute necessity. If being born predisposed to some behavior provided absolution from that behavior then nothing is wrong.
The question I pose to professing Christians that condone the homosexual lifestyle is: What is different about homosexuality now then when Paul wrote Romans, and his other epistles? Is the act different today? What has changed?
Paul's point in Romans is that evil is a process that starts with the rejection of God and the embracing of everything that is less than God. This godlessness is ultimately manifested in the embrace of sexual depravity in which homosexuality is at forefront.
My fear is this idea of inherent homosexuality will be used to leverage civil rights laws against professing churches. If what happened to the Catholic Charities is any sign, the body of Christ is in for some tough times.

What? No Flamers Awake Yet?
Great article, Dr Adams. Refuting emotion with cold, clear logic is always good.

Still, I'm surprised that there are no serious flamers attacking your dietary habits or something else equally as ridiculous. But the day is still young in LaLa Land.

Free Love
"Free love" is the sacred cow of the America-hating left. That is why they defended the disgraced rapist-in-chief. They were willing to overlook his patterns of sexual misconduct because he always stood up for abortion rights.

In what lifestyle is "love" more free than among men seeking men. Carlfred Broderick, a professor of sociology and marriage and family therapy at USC (so Cal) did a study in the 90s that showed that sexually active single men who have sex with men are 12-20 times more promiscuous than their woman seeking counterparts. "Homosexual" women are only about twice as promiscuous straight women. (I googled Broderick for the reference, but I quit looking after 20 pages or so. I read the study years ago and also saw a documentary about it on PBS.)

Some people do find themselves attracted to others of the same sex, or children, or animals, or food. But having an urge doesn't legitimize that urge just because one chooses to act on it -regardless of whether the person is "genetically predisposed" toward the urge. Most people will be sexually attracted to numerous others over the course of their lifetimes. Acting on every one of those urges would lead to utter depravity, which is precisely why God gave us specific rules regarding sexual behavior.

The ability to choose whether or not to act on every urge we have separates us from the animals. We can train our "instincts". Live your life making good, productive choices and it becomes easier to make the right choice and reject the wrong. If you live your life acting on every urge you feel, chances are you'll find yourself imprisoned for murder, or having unprotected sex in a toilet stall at a bar with some dude you just met. And, of course, you won't be able to draw the short, straight line between the choices you sowed and the consequences you are reaping.

To clarify tanabear's point for willie47, 80% of "homosexuals" who have an identical twin are sexually discordant with their twin, which (if you believe the gay community's inflated statistic that 10% of the population is gay) would mean that identical twins are twice as likely to be gay as single birth children. I would guess that 80% figure is a little low. It's probably more in line with the actual percentage of "homosexuals" in the U.S. - like 95-97% discord. If "homosexuality" was truely genetic, the percentage of sexual discord between identical twins would hover right around, oh, say, 0% - both straight, or both gay - end of duscussion.

"Homosexuality" is one of the biggest lies ever, which is why I put the word in quotation marks. To claim that it is anything other than deviant sexual behavior and a sexual addiction is utterly preposterous. It is bad behavior and, as such, should be shunned by society along with every other destructive behavior. Celebrating bad behavior under the banner of tolerance will only harm society as a whole. The hip-hop community already celebrates rapists and murderers as heroes. How far down this road are we willing to go before it destroys us?

Natural Urges and God's Will
I agree with Mike completely on this one. Pedophiles can argue that they cannot help their desire for young boys or girls and therefore it should not be considered wrong. Do Gays think pedophilia should be ok, or do they think there is a difference because of the age of consent?
The Bible teaches that homosexuality is wrong. It also teaches us to hate the sin but love the sinner. I have aquaintences and friends who are gay, and I respect them as human beings. I am not hostile toward them nor treat them like they have the plague. That does not mean I approve of their lifestyle nor do I think it should be openly accepted as ok. I especially dislike the aggressive, hatefilled activism that is perpetrated on people who openly express anti-gay opinions (such as at Georgia Tech). I also don't want your depraved lifestyle paraded before me.
We should all pray for the souls of those who are afflicted with the desire for a same-sex mate (and pedophiles).

Dont confuse "genetic" with good.
I have to go with Rich on this one. The weak point of the "it's genetic" argument is that it confuses "genetic" or "natural" with good. There are many things that are genetic and very bad. Alcoholism (also a destructive behavior, so more closely related to homosexuality than physical diseases) is bad EVEN IF it is genetic. Homosexuality is bad EVEN IF it is genetic. This is a more effective response to the "it's genetic" argument than trying to convince the por-gay faithful that it is not genetic. If homosexuality were conclusively proven to be entirely genetic, it still wouldn't be proven to be good.

This also makes sense from a Christian theology point of view. When Creation was corrupted by Sin every part of it was corrupted, including genetics. Sometimes this is manifested as Sickle Cell Anemia or hemophilia. All evil is the result of Sin. Sometimes it is the Sin of a specific individual. Sometimes it is the Sin acting through various systems like genetic illnesses. Every time it is less than God's plan and destructive to those in whom it is manifested.

Well said!
Having been involuntarily exposed to the so-called "gay lifestyle" by my former husband, I had a real opporunity to see up close what they were all about. It was my experience that it's not just what they do, it's what they are. It's how they identify themselves. It drives everything in their lives.

Keep up the great work, Mike. Thanks.

Theological confusion
The homosexual mantra of "God made me gay, so He must want me to BE gay" is nothing more than shabby theology: it confuses Nature with the Creator.

I have had this argument with a lesbian acquaintance. She argued that God made her homosexual, and thus she had no choice but to conform to her desires; after all, no one would consciously CHOOSE to live with oppression and ridicule, as gays must.

I countered that her predilictions toward same-sex partners may be inborn, but she could CHOOSE not to act on her predilictions; after all, what you ARE is usually defined by what you DO.

I also reminded her that, although most modern theologians find the idea distasteful, God does have an Adversary who delights in causing pain and anguish in God's Creation. The two things that differentiate Satan and God are God's benevolence (versus Satan's malevolence) and God's ability to create something from nothing; Satan cannot create, he can only pervert. One can argue that homosexual tendencies, however acquired, are the result of Satan's twisting of a person's NORMAL, NATURAL sexuality.

I grant you that there may be genetic aberrations that skew an individual's sexual identity or desires; also that these could be caused by exposure to various toxins or mutagens while in the womb; also that one's experiences in life may color your reaction to sex (overbearing mother, recessive father, molestation, etc.). None of these things stand in the way of a person CHOOSING not to sin. I may have an irresistable urge to set things on fire; the fact of the urge is not an excuse for me to commit arson.

Any human, having undergone correct spiritual formation and having a strong desire to conform himself or herself to God's will, can overcome all temptation to stray from their path. It remains a matter of choice.

One last point: "homophobia" is not an irrational fear, hatred or distrust of homosexuals; it is a feal of things that are identical. An irrational fear, hatred or distrust of homosexuals is called "paraphobia", and is more correctly rendered as a fear of sexual perversion - which homosexuality IS, no matter how vehemently the gay lobby argues that it is not.

It is not a matter of Theology/Genetics
We can discuss whether homosexuality is a sin or whether it is genetic for years and never come to a satisfactory conclusion. In fact, I believe we have done exactly that. All of this arguing hides a larger issue. Namely, what kind of nation are we?

This country was founded as a plural nation. It is a nation where all religions and points of view can be expressed without the fear of persecution. This is expressed explicitly in the First Amendment and it is the underpinning of our societal character. We have not always lived up to this ideal, but it is the hope our Founding Fathers held out for us.

Many people here believe profoundly that homosexuality is a sin. In this country they have a right to that belief and they have a right to express that belief in whatever forum they can access. Many people, especially outside this forum, believe homosexuality is not a sin. They too have the right to their belief and the right to express it any forum available.

The beauty and the challenge of a plural society is to allow divergent opinions to exist side-by-side in an atmosphere of tolerance and respect. Right now, our society is so polarized; this simple concept has been almost completely lost. I think the way back is to remember the Golden Rule, Do Unto Others…If you want your beliefs to be tolerated and respected, you have to tolerate and respect the beliefs of others who are different from yours. Instead of demonizing and marginalizing others, lead by example.

They protest too much.
To call us 'homophobes' and to demand respect and
acceptance is way over the line. Homosexuals and Lesbians protest and denigrate us, based on their emotions rather than facts. Too bad their brains can't handle analysis based on the truth.

Tolerance vs. Acceptance
JJBiener writes: "If you want your beliefs to be tolerated and respected, you have to tolerate and respect the beliefs of others who are different from yours."

Oh, balderdash; homosexual activists don't want tolerance, they want acceptance of their lifestyle as valid and coequal to normal heterosexuality.

I don't respect the beliefs of homosexual activists - or their desire for acceptance - any more than I respect the beliefs of Islamists, because their beliefs proceed from a demonstrably false and pernicious philosophy.

Much of the moral decay of the past thirty years in America has come from the idea that there is no such thing as absolute right or absolute wrong. Nothing is black and white; everything exists in a gray miasma of polemics.

There *are* moral absolutes, and anyone with a grain of sense can name half a dozen in less than a minute. Even someone with the most rudimentary moral sense can differentiate good and evil, and thus derive the moral imperative that good must be done and evil must be avoided. When something can be demonstrated as detrimental to a society, it must be shunned, and those whose practices are detrimental must be encouraged to avoid those practices and conform themselves to good practices.

Homosexuals possess the same dignity as all God's creatures, and they must not suffer indignity therefore; nonetheless, homosexuality is "malum in se" - evil in and of itself - because it militates against the natural order.

I don't accept homosexuality as coequal to my own lifestyle because it can't be, and I will not grant validity to any argument that proposes to prove that it is. The entire idea is absurd.

a question
i'm a moderate voter that trys to read the posts of people that i don't agree with to figure out where they are coming from. why don't religious folks realize that their behavior contradicts their words? you are expecting nonbelievers to conform to your views. calling a nonbeliever a sinner, and worse, is stupid. only a believer can be a sinner. i think the amish have it right. they have their beliefs and peacefully coexist with local folks. i was raised baptist but by 7th grade recognized the hypocrasy and stopped going. so many tell me not to judge all christians by the actions of a few, but it isn't just the few. i've yet to meet a christian that can live without sinning. they want to judge everyone else but can't pass the test themselves. judgement causes shame, not change. folks ban together under their common badge of being judged and they are likely to revel in it just to anger those that judge them. you inspire rebellious reactions to your judgements. you put consentual sex higher up on your list than child molestation, or domestic violence, poverty, or any other more critical and larger issues. all this religious anger is very scary and i wonder why anyone would want to be christian. i'm one of the judged people and i can tell you that we're a lot more forgiving of each other as we know we're not perfect. i don't at all expect to change any minds. i won't be reading your replies to my post either as my feelings get hurt when i'm called names. words hurt more than fists.

Question for Ciara:
Where exactly in the Bible does it state "homosexual offenders will not enter the kingdom of God."??

Not attacking you, don't get me wrong, I am FIRMLY in the same camp as you, I also believe that the Bible expressly calls out homosexuality as a detestable sin, but I do not remember ever reading the quote you use. Just curious on where you found that.

for Robin
I know you said you won't be reading replies, but I am hoping God moves you to look -- please, please do not do what I did and stop going to church because of all the hypocrites. I missed out on the blessings of following our Lord's path for 12 years that way.

Last year I felt a call to find a good church home, and I do not regret it. Now sure, there are some insincere people, some hypocrites, but I found a church that OVERALL I liked, and got involved... not just going Sundays but volunteering for things the church was doing, etc etc. I am doing the Lord's work now, and being blessed for it. I am also HAPPIER now because I am doing what God wants us to - fellowship is IN that Bible!!

Please, do not let bad witnesses and morons keep you from either finding Salvation for the first time, or if you already have found Salvation, then finding some good, sincere, humble Christians, and enjoying the blessings of fellowship.

I was in the same boat as you -- and it took a WHILE -- lots of churches, but I now am in with a church, and a small group, that is filled with wonderful, honest, REAL people... that are not very judgmental at ALL. Some? Yes, but we all are that way. A bit of Scripture that not many Christians like to remember, is Romans 3:23 : "For ALL have sinned and come short of the glory of God". That applies to the faithful, AND the unfaithful. My group REALLY understands that -- I only wish all Christians did, the witnesses would be ever so much more effective that way. If you lived in SE Texas, I'd be happy to show you what a good group was like :)

Brilliant!
Another brilliant column, Dr. Adams!

to craigctx
Hi Craig,
The scripture you are looking for is I Cor. 6: 9-10. Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
Just FYI anybody else ... this includes the "greedy". Anyone been greedy lately? Oops.

Without Christ, we are all damned.

Faundel
You're right. There are things that most people do every day regardless of who/what they find sexually attractive. But not all lifestyles are equivalent. Some benefit society while others are harmful.

Cooking meals for shut-ins is a lifestyle. So is cooking meth.

Spending your nights trolling bars so you and your partner can swap bodily fluids with one or more people you've never met before is a lifestyle. It is hardly equivalent to that of a faithful husband/wife relationship.

"Homosexual" activists bring narrow judgement on the people for whom they claim to be fighting. Any man who enters a parade dressed up as Dorothy the transvestite hooker, and then expects to be treated respectfully, deserves the judgement society wields.

i agree totaly
i know alot of people have said this, and it is so common that it has become a cliche' but who cares. when God created the world he made man and woman[adam and eve] not 2 men [adam and steve]. to call it natural would actually criticize the very God who created us! i don't think so! read on and you will find more. for this shall a man leave his mother and cleave unto his WIFE. hmmm maybe that will make a point?

Three men and a baby
I have several of the replies to this article and some have said gays claim "God made me this way". If God made them that way, then why does God so adamantly oppose and condemn the act of homosexuality?

Secondly, one comment was that they get up go to work, wash their car, mow their lawns etc just like other people. Yes, they probably do, but they do more as well.

If they did not act in a most strange way with their "gay parades" where they dress up with painted bodies, strange clothes, and I guess in some cases there have been incidents of no clothes, try to force their chosen life on everyone else as normal, if they didn't have their Southern Dacadence days in New Orleans, perhaps they would not be looked upon with such disdain.

God made me this way
God sent me into this world buck naked and screaming. Unlike many "homosexuals", I have decided not to spend my whole life that way.

How do we know?

We hope you will continue using your gifts to address the most important question facing our culture. What will be our authority? Thanks for illustrating this issue so well. Many of us can relate to the deceitfulness of our own hearts in finding a way to justify our own sin. Part of what it means to be lost is to be unaware of the fact that we are blind.

If science says that man is no different than the animal, then what is wrong with following our impulses?

What is wrong with us that we should restrict our behavior based on an authority outside ourselves?

How do we know which authority to trust?


It's a great day for hate!
Jesus. With all the flagrant anti-homosexual bigotry spewing forth here, you'd think the column was written by Fred Phelps. But no. It was actually in response to one of Dr. Adams' keeping-up-appearances/meeting-my-quota "columns" -- an all-too-regular occurance by this townhall.com find. The entire column is, in fact, even more anemic than usual, with almost half of the space devoted to a blockquoted story. The point Adams wrangles from it -- that you can't just validate a lifestyle if some choose to say it's natural -- is hard to argue with. It's also largely irrelevant in the grand scheme of things, but Adams never pretends to be making a grand statment. As is his style, he slyly avoids having to actually make a stand, only stating what his hatemail writers choose to say of him without validating it one way or the other. As per this column, only his detractors say he hates gays. Hell, only his detractors say he's critical of gays.

And yet, what's the result? 40 comments (as of this post), almost all of which are hateful, bible-thumping invective a mere call to murder away from a missive from the godhatesfags.com cabal. Good job, people.

P.S. Good job, townhall.com, on finally reformatting the comments board.

animalgirlisback,
I take it that you disagree with the column.

last two comments
Note that the last comment refers to Adams as hate filled. How about the homosexual to whom he was responding? Was that hate speech? And how about the previous comment that called Adams gay? Is that all you have, gay critics? You call people gay as an insult? Now who is filled with hate? Self hate, that is.

arglebargle,
Just to clarify: Is the mere quoting of Scripture "Bible thumping"? Do you consider the Scripture quotes "invective" or is it the posters' comments on the Scripture that you consider "invective"? Does disagreement automatically equal hate? Are you always this hyperbolic? And, while I'm at it, what do you think of Townhall's Big Brothering of the language used in these posts?

AnimalGirl
That was funny!

LOL!

arglebargle
Did you actually read the comments? I read each one and with the exception of two, I really did not notice the "hate." Can you possibly describe what you find so hateful here?

Didn't you know?
Speaking common sense and telling the truth are hateful practices when the speaker (writer) isn't in lock step with the left.

On the other hand, there isn't a lie a leftist won't sell as gospel, oops, um, darwinian scientific truth if it furthers their agenda.

Conservative Gay
I really have a hard time believing that anyone who is an intelligent adult can equate homosexuality with the story in the article. Are there people who really believe that Harvey Firestein just didn't find the right girl? The articles premise is silly. Gay people, for what ever reason, are just gay. The so called "cures" have been debunked for ages now. The ones today are as reputable as a pyramid sham. I went to school and was stationed in Utah as a young man. I knew many a Mormon boy sent for the "cure". A stay in GITMO sounds like a kinder proposition than their experiences. I never knew of anyone who said it worked. There is a reason they never allow outside scrutiny of their results. I've been gay, and conservative, for all of my adult life. I've never been prone to proposition 13 year old girls, (per the story example.), or boys. I have served my country in very difficult conditions and have very little to no agreement with the "gay community". I'm a die-hard fan of Mr. Reagan who made me a liflong conservative. When I read comments like some that I've read here, I wonder if my loyalty isn't misplaced and the Party that I have loved hasn't in fact been taken over by those who sneer at individual liberty. (I assume we are mostly Republicans here...). I'm oppossed to "gay marriage" recocgnition, hate crimes and the like, but we must, as a good and just society, stop stigmitizing and demonizing those who are gay and have no ability to change it and who wish to live a happy life with someone they love. Have any of the readers actually been to a gay neighborhood? It's a conservatives ideal in many ways. They are often the safest, nicest, most crime free in a city. Gay people are disproportionally, home owners and business owners. As Republican Mayor Reirdon used to answer when asked about his pro-gay support..."Easy, they refurbish old neighborhoods, pay their taxes and don't bother anyone, including each other by the crime stats." What more does society want?


Three men and a baby
Gays claim that they were "born that way, therefore, it is God's will"...Well, if it is God's will and they were born that way, then why does God so adamantly condemn the practice of homosexuality..

One comment by a poster said that they "go to work, pay taxes, wash their cars, mow their lawns etc...Well they probably do, but then they also have their "gay pride parades" where they dress up like morons, with painted bodies, wear dresses, weird clothes and act like fools...

Perhaps if they did not flaunt their "sexual orientation" in such a manor, no one would bother them and they wouldn't be so despised.

for Scribulator / Ciara
That passage would condemn us ALL, until you properly qualified it with "Without Christ, we are all damned" -- the reason I asked Ciara about that is that she unfairly puts homosexual sinners in front of the rest of the sinners, and ALL have sinned and come short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23). What I was trying to have Ciara "see" is that homosexual sinners are only prevented from entering the Kingdom if they do not accept Jesus Christ (just like the rest of us)... now, true acceptance of Jesus involves a little thing called Repentance, which in turn involves admission of your sin and a resolve not to repeat that sin... one can be "homosexual and be saved" if they are no longer a "practicing" homosexual, just as I once committed adultery and can still be saved -- because I repent, ask forgiveness, and SIN NO MORE.

Basically what I am getting at is homosexuals are unfairly put at the forefront of the Lost -- certainly, they are condemned, if they do not accept Salvation... but the way many folks on here make it sound, on Judgment day God is going to put them in a special pink bus and drive them off the cliff into Hell before anything else takes place... posts like that are a bad witness, as folks like Robin can tell you. Sinners are turned away from God enough by Satan whispering to them, we Christians do NOT need to be helping Satan out!

Animalgirl and Arglebargle
I see animalgirl IS back, and using the old thieves dodge of when caught doing wrong, distract and obfuscate, and run! Little animal, your implying Adams is gay is pathetic. If Adams DOES think a lot about gays, it is likely in the vein of how best to reach them, to show them that they ARE indeed sinners. All Christians know that the first step to finding Salvation is to ADMIT you are a sinner... the homosexual community as a whole will not admit that their homosexuality is a sin, and THAT is what Adams and all the so-called "haters" point out. (OK, to be fair, many Christians go overboard on the Gay Bashing) If Adams IS focussing a lot on homosexuals, it is because he loves them (as people, not partners, before you use that against me) and is trying to HELP them... but like most sinners, most of them do not want to be helped. Sad, since Salvation is so easy.

For Arglebargle: I never thought I would say this, but the nutjobs at godhatesfags.com actually are CORRECT in their doctrine, to a point. If you took long enough to read their view on things (I did) you will see that they, properly, believe that Repentance involves not only admitting your sin, but a resolve not to repeat said sin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repentance), and it is their thought that if Saved, a homosexual will not do that sin anymore, therefore, they are no longer a homosexual. NOTHING COULD BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH, HOWEVER... yes, God will help you with temptation, but Satan tempted even Jesus, so loyal followers CAN and DO slip from time to time, so if a person who was a homosexual, repented and became saved, and swore off homosexual behavior, then "slipped" and had homorelations, they do not "lose" their Salvation. That does not give them an "out" to repeatedly commit the sin, however (Romans 6 spells that out for us).

Now, though THAT one small part of their message has merit, let me state for the record, the hateful way WBC spreads that message, is NOT helping God's cause in the least... picketing at funerals and the like only makes people not even listen to them... most people revile Christians enough to begin with, no need for the Christian to exacerbate the problem by acting revolting as well. And, these people claim to be Prophets? Well, God sends His prophets BEFORE he does things, and those prophets proclaim EXACTLY what God is going to do, not scream after the fact, for example, "Hurricane Katrina was God's wrath!!" Had Katrina been of God, we would have been warned ahead of time, publicly and unmistakeably. (I cannot remember if WBC said that or not, but they do say things after the fact like that and claim "such and such is God's wrath" -- I would go to their site and look up a better example but our internet filter at work blocks their site as "Hate Speech" -- go figure :P)

Tolerance or Sanctification
Why do people that struggle for tolerance invariably demand santification? A "live and let live" position (tolerance) is quite different from sanctification (acceptance). The irony is that once the group acheives tolerance, they become utterly intolerant of the very people that have shown them tolerance. This seems to be the MO of most "oppressed groups" in this country. No matter how much is done to accomodate blacks, gays, feminists, etc., it invariably leads to demands for ever more and unreasonable concessions.

What did Jesus really say?
People who think that Jesus's views regarding homosexual behavior are unclear, if not acquiescent, are not taking his words very seriously:

"Haven't you read," he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator `made them male and female,' and said, `For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh' ? So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate."

Matthew 19:4-6

"For this reason" we have marriage. For what reason? Because the Creator made them MALE and FEMALE.

You can disregard Jesus words if you choose, but the words are clear enough for anybody who wants to really know.

THE WHOLE DEBATE IS ASININE
arglebargle, and a few others on this post, like animal girl, really should learn how to read, and understand, the English language.

Dr. Adams doesn't "hate" gays, he merely disapproves of their lifestyle. My wife and I disapprove of the gay "lifestyle" but we have several gay friends. We do not agree with their lifestyle, but we do not condem them either. As an example, "John and Joe" are our neighbors. Both are nice, upstanding citizens with good jobs, nice home, etc., that happen to be gay. "John" and "Joe" are avid collectors of antique autos. We have spent many hours discussing the different cars they own. I have spent many hours helping "John" work on them as I am the better mechanic, he is very good at body and interior restoration. My wife has spent many hours with "Joe" discussing drapes, new carpet, whatever women talk about when the men are not around. We have drank many a beer at parties at their house. They have attended many a barbeque at our house. We have been to gay nightclubs with them, and other gay friends, just as they have been to "straight" nightclubs with us and other "straight" friends of theirs.

They are our friends, it's that simple, and just because we do not agree with the way they live makes no difference at all. And, this is just one example, we are friends with several gay couples, male and female.

Woodworker, you hit the nail right on the head. If these rabblerousing activist gays would just shut up it would help all that choose to live with someone of the same sex. Nobody likes a crybaby. The friends we have do not flaunt their sexual preference. They go to very few "gay rights" parades, marches, any of that nonsense, they just lead their lives quietly, with dignity, like the majority of us try to do.

For all you hard-core Bible thumpers out there: Our Lord, and Jesus Christ, our Savior, teach tolerance, so where is yours? Other than funerals or weddings, I have not set foot inside a Church in 40 years. For the most part I found them full of hippocrits, bent on telling people that their way was the only way to salvation. I do my own reading and can interpret what I read myself. I do not believe I should have to pay a preacher, priest, whatever, to drive new Lincolns and wear $1000 dollar suits, to tell me THEIR view of what is right and wrong. I can figure that out myself. Anyone who thinks that "their way is the only way" should run off and join the Hezbolla or al-qaidha, (mispelling intentional), because you are no better than they are.







Hypocrites?
for all the people who think picking on gays for being sinners when everyone is a sinner is immoral or unchristian or hypocrtical, the problem isnt that they have sinned, the problem is that they want everyone to say that their sin is okay and shouldn't be considered a sin anymore. and christians don't think they are perfect, but they do think they are trying to be as close as they can be, and it seems to me that usually any "judgements" that devout christians make are disgust/dissapointment at people who don't even try to stop sinning, admit that they sin, or show any remorse after they do. it's the lack of striving for perfection, not the lack of perfection itself that makes the actions of many gays unacceptable to most christians.

also, my dad's cousin was gay until he became a christian, and now he's not gay anymore. just thought that might interest people who claim you can't change gays

To Jerry
I am THE WAY, the Truth and the Life, NO ONE comes to the Father EXCEPT THROUGH ME. Jesus said that in John 14:6. That is why Christians say there way is the only right way. They are only repeating what Jesus, who by the way happens to be God, you know that guy who is never wrong, said. They didn't make it up and you don't have to like it. Take it up with the Big Guy. I am sure he'll value your opinion and taki it into consideration in His plan.

can we all agree on liberal gaybashing?
Can we all agree that when liberals call someone "gay" for criticizing homosexuality they are, in fact, gay-bashing?

The same , tired old rhetoric...
Mike Adams and his enthusiastic supporters are at it again, with another round of why THEIR version of Christianity enables and entitles them to compare Gay, Lesbian, Bi and Trans people to pedophiles and other crimianl deviants. And they say WE are shoving our "issues" down THEIR throats?? Really.
I'd like to some a show of hands for anyone who wants to live under Hebrew Law, the same law that keeps getting referenced by Dr. Adams and his ilk. I really like the bits in Deuternomy where disobediant children can be stoned to death, soldiers at war can take captive women as sexual property and rapists can buy off the fathers of their victems.
Seriously, why are we still having this discussion? Why does anyone still think that 3,000 year old codes of conduct have ANY relevence today? The only answer that comes to mind is that it gives some higher justification for bigotry. "Hey, like, I only hate you and say you should be stoned and burned in the fire is because God said so, right? It's nothing personal."
This brings another interesting question. Are the Holiness Codes, or "The Law" as we understand it, actually divinely inspired? In the church where I was raised, I was taught that all Scripture is inerrant, or perfect, and that all Scripture is profitable for teaching and reproof. Hmm! Does anyone remember all those Scriptures from Paul that were used to justify slavery, Jim Crow and apartheid? Anyone? (crickets chirping) Does anyone really want to claim that God is okay with rape, as long as the girls father gets paid off or that slaves should live in fear and trembling of their masters?
Or, should we consider the possibility that Scripture may be inspired, but also reflect cultural realities and predjidices of the time. Holding up the absolute letter of the Law, bereft of historical context and devoid of Christs' love is a form of idolatry!! The supposed word of God (as you think to interpret it) becomes more important than and set above God himself! This is the height of arrogance and folly.
As for myself, I am a Transgendered woman who is also a Christian, a moderate Republican, a parent and many other labels. I have my own things to answer to God for and I pray for His understanding. I don't think my "Trans" issue is one of those problems.

Three men and a baby article
Calm down people. Once more Dr. Adams has gotten his posters to do his bidding.
Yes times have changed; no, there's no single answer; no, there won't be one soon.
Save some of the polemics for more important causes. You're not changing anyone's mind.
tkooter

Three men and a baby article
Calm down people. Once more Dr. Adams has gotten his posters to do his bidding.
Yes times have changed; no, there's no single answer; no, there won't be one soon.
Save some of the polemics for more important causes. You're not changing anyone's mind.
tkooter

to Celtic Dragon
Mike wasn't just using Hebrew Law, which yes we as Gentiles were never held to and yes MOST, but not all of them were cultural. However, a son still shouldn;t sleep with his mother, a man still shouldn't murder another man, and two people of the same sex shouldn't be having sex with each other. That being said, all sin is bad. My lies, anger, lust are just as bad as homosexual behavior. The difference is, I know it and repent of it and try not to do it. By the way homosexuality is condemned in the New Testament too. More than once.

For the Record
In the past, people commenting on Mike's columns have suggested that he always includes subjects' email addresses in order to "punish" them, or otherwise create a frenzy of negative email for them.

So, for the record, anyone who has offered that critique should observe that Mike provided no email address in this column.

If he does it sometimes to pressure for action, so be it, but this column is evidence that generalizations about his "always" doing it are false.

homosexuality
"The very nature of homosexuality is based completely on eroticism and the infatuation with sex and preverted sex."

homosexuality
The very nature of homosexuality is based completely on eroticism and the infatuation with sex and preverted sex.

Same Gender Marriage Debate
Starting a "diablog" with a blogger in favor of "gay marriage" while I'm opposed. Here's his column at my blog, Bloggin' Outloud - http://blogginoutloud.blogspot.com/2006/07/current-argument-gay-marriage-part-1.html
And here's my response at his blog, aTypical Joe - http://www.atypicaljoe.com/archives/2006/07/the_great_gay_m.php
Courteous, intellegent comments always welcome.

No, homosexuality is NOT genetic!


When I was searching for a biologist position, I got an interview with Washington University in MO. Its an international university and has the largest Genome Dept. (genetics).

I started to ask this employee if they found any cures for any cancer at all. Before I got my question finished, he said "Oh, are you going to ask about homosexuality? Because, he said, there is no gene. I said that I knew. How do I know? Because I took a genetics class and my professor said this. And students ask these questions in college. Plus, I do research myself on it.

So, folks - please don't let people try to tell you "I was born that way". Not genetically!!

Genetics and Darwin are Irrelevant
My ancestors were Welsh. As followers of diverse Celtic and Druidic practices, they hallowed the living spirits of ancient tree groves. To promote fertility in both crops and people, they practiced child rape and child sacrifice, draining the blood of their own children on the roots of their trees. Germans, Aztecs, and Africans have related barbaric practices one can read about.

I am not proud of that aspect of my heritage, but...

They were just doing what comes natural. However, to move onward as a civil society, they had to give these practices up, natural or not. Doing what comes naturally is a hollow justification for any behavior, especially if it is noxious.

Darwinian processes matter not at all. They take millions of years to accomplish gradual small changes, so don't expect any sudden extinction of either homosexual or heterosexuals, since homosexuality is rather new in the grand scheme of time.

To many heteros, it would be nice if homosexuals were already extinct. But actually, that thinking is backwards. I am glad that there are growing numbers of homosexuals. That leaves more girls for the diminishing numbers of us hetero guys, so eventually we will dominate in the grand scheme!

I am opposed to GLBT marriage and allowing GLBTs to adopt principally on the grounds that this would promote the offensive idea that putting ones willy or tongue into a poop chute is "normal." I wouldn't even consider doing that to a woman myself - how disgusting to think of seeing the remains of last night's taco covering my hooter! And you want to claim THAT is God given? If so, may you be covered in s**t the rest of your days. Then you will be truly blessed.

Great article Mike, put so eloquently and deliciously sarcastic. I always look forward to your writing!

Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.