I was born in 1950 with several medical problems including neurological complications and a cleft lip and palate, which required immediate treatment and isolation from my mother – literally from the moment of birth. My sudden and violent separation from her resulted in two emotional (read: psychological) conditions universally recognized and validated by Christian and secular psychotherapeutic professions: separation anxiety and defensive detachment.
This tradtional, well-trod, yet unresolved battleground gets a thorough going over from James R. Aist at iPost, the Christian Post blog site. Many familiar names in the footnotes, including some old friends and colleagues, so it makes for good reading. Aist leans quite heavily on New Zealand researchers/authors Neil and Briar Whitehead, whose facetiously-titled My Genes Made Me Do It! forms the majority of his thesis.
Aist breaks the article into a number of predictable, yet compelling and heavily footnoted pieces:
Therapy and Counseling Results
The Role of Choice in Homosexuality
Models for the Development of Sexual Orientation
Homosexuality Is Not From God
All in all, this is likely a very helpful piece for those lay leaders and pulpit pilots too busy or simply unequipped to research this issue.
From C-FAM, the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute, comes this highlight of a revealing book due out Oct. 1st:
Matthew Shepard was a young man who was brutally murdered in October
1998. Almost immediately global attention turned to the speculation that
Shepard’s killers tortured and murdered him out of animus that he was
gay. His killers tied him to a fence outside of the tiny town of
Laramie, Wyoming and his death was compared to the crucifixion of Jesus
Within days of his death Shepard became the face of gay rights in
America and around the world. A New York Times editorial from that time
suggested Shepard was the representative of gay rights the movement had
needed all along. He was young, handsome and innocent.
. . .
All along there were naysayers to the Shepard narrative. Social
critic Camille Paglia wrote in Salon that Shepard had a taste for what
is called “rough trade” and that he could have died from that.
Detectives at the time suggested that his death was more than likely
tied to drugs rather than his homosexuality. An ABC 20/20 segment
several years later explored that possibility.
However, a new book out by award winning gay journalist Steven
Jiminez goes much further than previous critics of the Shepard
The Book of Matt reveals what Laramie, WY residents knew all along, that Matt
Shepard was very involved in the local drug scene, was likely an
occasional drug dealer himself, but even more importantly, he knew his
killers. More than that, however, Shepard and his killers had sex together.
Excellent post from Julie Rodgers on the natural tendency to replace God with our own fallen sexuality:
Sometimes I made it the biggest deal ever by embracing all things gay, analyzing all things gay, obsessing over all things gay, and trying to figure out how to be the best gay I could be. Other times I made it the biggest deal ever by embracing not-being-gay, analyzing not-being-gay, obsessing over all things not-being-gay, and trying to figure out how to be the best not-gay I could be. Either way, my gay gazing has frequently shifted my gaze away from the one I love most, which is a much bigger problem than being gay or not being gay (even though we’re prone to believe gay is the biggest deal ever).
The core of this new group, recently interviewed by
Christianity magazine, are Sam Alberry, a church leader in Maidenhead,
Sean Doherty, a tutor at St Mellitus College, and Ed Shaw, who helps to
lead Emmanuel Church in Bristol.
These are men in pastoral ministry who admit to feelings of same sex
attraction but who also see the Bible’s prohibitions on same-sex
relationships as non-negotiable.
They are shortly to launch a website called ‘Living Out’, aimed at
helping others think through the realities of being same-sex attracted
while remaining committed to a biblical sexual morality.
From Robert A.J. Gagnon: Coming
soon to a locale near you, thanks to supporters of homosexual practice
around the world: "Advocating for the right of consenting adults to
share and enjoy love, sex, residence, and marriage without limits on the
gender [= homosexual practice], number [= polygamy of all shapes,
heterosexual and homosexual], or relation [= incest] of participants.
Full marriage equality is a basic human right." Arguments by proponents
of "gay marriage" are no different from those supporting
adult-consensual polyamory or incest. Indeed, one has to leapfrog over
polyamorous and incestuous unions between consenting adults to validate
the even more extreme violation of sexual ethics known as "gay marriage"
since the twoness of the sexual bond (no polygamy) and the necessity of
embodied complementary otherness (no incest) is predicated ultimately
on a male-female paradigm. As this site says on its headline moniker.
Even knowing that there are radicals in all movements, doesn't lessen the startling admission recently by lesbian journalist Masha Gessen.
On a radio show she actually admits that homosexual activists are lying
about their radical political agenda. She says that they don't want to
access the institution of marriage; they want to radically redefine and
eventually eliminate it.
Pretty telling is this quote from Gessen:
"It's a no-brainer that (homosexual activists) should have the right to
marry, but I also think equally that it's a no-brainer that the
institution of marriage should not exist. …(F)ighting for gay marriage
generally involves lying about what we are going to do with marriage
when we get there — because we lie that the institution of marriage is
not going to change, and that is a lie."
To vote for it, to legislate it, to rule in favor of it, to tell your
friends at the office that you think it's just fine—all this is sin. To
support it publicly or privately is to "give approval to those who
practice" the very things that God promises to judge—exactly what we're
told not to do in Romans 1:32.
Further, same-sex marriage embraces a definition of humanity that is
less than human and a definition of love that is less than love. And it
is not freedom from religion that the advocates of same-sex marriage
want; they want to repress one religion in favor of another.
Christians must not go with the flow. They must instead love the
advocates of same-sex marriage better than they love themselves
precisely by refusing to endorse it.
I have some concerns with Marco Rubio, but I think at heart he is a pro-US, pro-liberty conservative who has simply to be corrected on a number of premises he’s adopted along the way, after which his message will resonate more completely with constitutionalists who remain dubious. In the meanwhile, I like this.
"Romantic love is blind to everything except what is lovable and lovely, but Christ's love sees us with terrible clarity and sees us whole. Christ's love so wishes our joy that it is ruthless against everything in us that diminishes our joy. The worst sentence Love can pass is that we behold the suffering which Love has endured for our sake, and that is also our acquittal. The justice and mercy of the judge are ultimately one." - Frederick Buechner
“THE terrible danger at the heart of our Society is that the tests are giving way. We are altering, not the evils, but the standard of good which is the only standard by which any evil can be detected and defined.” ~G.K. Chesterton