Posted on 02/12/2020 8:33:40 AM PST by SeekAndFind
It is certainly politically incorrect to say this. In fact, in the eyes of many, what I’m about to say is a classic example of extreme religious bigotry. But I will say it nonetheless. Choosing an out and proud “married” gay man to run for president, let alone become president, would contribute to the further degeneration and moral confusion of our society along with further attacks on our most fundamental rights.
When I tweeted this statement out on February 8, it received far more retweets and likes than my average tweet. Far more. So, it obviously struck a chord. The support was strong and consistent.
Also, as expected, there were words of condemnation and rebuke, including this tweet from Bible teacher Gilbert Gonzalez Jr. He wrote: “Please tell me this tweet is from a different century. There is no way that anyone today that has any education would ever write something so generally uninformed, childish, and biblically ignorant. This is why people don’t take Christianity seriously. Its leaders refuse to learn.”
Obviously, I fully expected responses like this. That’s why I began my tweet by saying, “Call me a homophobic bigot, but I'll say it anyway.”
What else could I expect? The moment you say a word about Mayor Pete being “married” to another man, all while flaunting his deep Christian faith, you will be called a homophobic bigot.
So be it. I’ve been called worse things than that.
Come to think of it, Jesus Himself, our perfect Savior, was called far worse things.
And He told us to expect the same: “It is enough for students to be like their teachers, and servants like their masters. If the head of the house has been called Beelzebul [basically, the devil himself], how much more the members of his household!”
According to Prof. Randall Rauser, however, to call me a homophobic bigot is not out of line. (Prof. Rauser is a moderate Canadian evangelical and a constant basher of President Trump.) As he wrote in his blog, “Behavior and reasoning like this provide very plausible evidence that Christians like Brown have an irrational fear of and/or antipathy toward gay people.”
Indeed, according to Prof. Rauser, “Evangelicals like Brown fall over themselves to excuse Trump’s grotesque immorality. . . . Among his latest egregious actions, last week he mocked the words of Jesus at the National Prayer Breakfast while evangelical pastors laughed in the audience.”
But that’s where Prof. Rauser misses the point, as do Gilbert Gonzalez and other critics. (See also this excellent response to Rauser by Steve Hayes.)
First, I have never excused the president’s past immorality. In fact, I probably called attention to it as much as any evangelical leader during the primaries. To say, I “fall over [myself] to excuse Trump’s grotesque immorality” is to speak a lie.
Second, to this day, like a broken record, I draw attention to aspects of the president’s behavior that I find destructive and harmful. In fact, shortly after the National Prayer Breakfast, I wrote an article addressing the very issues Prof. Rauser mentioned regarding Trump’s response to the words of Jesus.
So, to brand me hypocritical for speaking out against Mayor Pete’s proud homosexuality is to be either misinformed, dishonest, or both.
But there is a much bigger issue that the critics are missing.
President Trump is not flaunting his past immorality, nor is he pushing it presently. Instead, when the ugly tape of his lewd comments went public, he said, “I’ve never said I’m a perfect person, nor pretended to be someone that I’m not. I’ve said and done things I regret, and the words released today on this more than a decade-old video are one of them. Anyone who knows me knows these words don’t reflect who I am. I said it, I was wrong, and I apologize . . . . I pledge to be a better man tomorrow and will never, ever let you down.”
In stark contrast, Mayor Pete has talked about how his homosexual relationship to his “husband” Chasten has brought him closer to God. He has kissed his partner at public rallies. He is pushing his homosexuality, not apologizing for it.
You better believe that he will do everything in his power to normalize homosexual relationships even more in the eyes of America. He will also do his best to marginalize those who are convinced that these relationships are contrary to the will of God.
And this leads me to the primary reason for my tweet (and for this article).
It is not so much that homosexual practice is worse than adultery or fornication. Rather, it is the fact that there is an aggressive, gay agenda that has systematically undermined biblical morals for decades. It has also sought to silence all dissenting voices, becoming the principle threat to our religious and moral freedoms.
That’s why I’ve been active in resisting LGBT activism since 2004, reaching out to individuals with compassion but resisting the agenda with courage.
And so, it is not the people whom I oppose. (God forbid. I’ve made that clear hundreds, if not thousands of times.) It is not even homosexual acts which primarily concern me (although issues of health and safety should not be ignored.)
It is an aggressive agenda that I oppose, one that I and others have tracked carefully for many years. (See already the important 2003 volume by Alan Sears and Craig Osten, The Homosexual Agenda: Exposing the Principal Threat to Religious Freedom Today.)
It is an agenda that would only be fueled with great intensity by an out and proud gay president.
And so, just as President Obama’s administration pushed radical trans activism on our nation’s schools, under severe penalties, things would only intensify under a president who would flaunt his “husband” being the country’s first “First Gentleman.”
In the end, this has nothing to do with having “an irrational fear of and/or antipathy toward gay people.” (How is it that Christian leaders end up repeating the world’s talking points?)
Instead, it has everything to do with recognizing where gay activism has taken us in the last 50+ years and recognizing where it wants to take us next.
I, for one, will continue to sound the alarm in advance.
Things are confused enough already. We don’t need to make things any worse.
Calling me a homophobic bigot will only avoid dealing with the real issues at hand.
We avoid them to our own demise.
Dr. Michael Brown (www.askdrbrown.org) is the host of the nationally syndicated Line of Fire radio program. His latest book is Jezebel's War With America: The Plot to Destroy Our Country and What We Can Do to Turn the Tide.
If Elizabeth Warren and Hillary Clinton are more “manly” than Mayor Pete how are countries hostile to America going to react to his administration?
Thank you. I will bet that a large amount of people who voted for him are not even aware of the fact that he is Gay. That’s because the media including Fox are afraid to even bring it up for fear they will be accused of being Homophobic. He is not only gay and married to another man, apparently he is the “Receiver/Female” partner in the marriage. Does America want a Gay guy and a First Husband? I think not!
It is not bigotry to be opposed to homosexual activity or what homosexuals do to advance their perversions or even to their homosexuality itself.
Homosexuality is perverse, corrupt and evil. It is proper and just to oppose and these things should have remained illegal.
If it is bigotry to be opposed to faggotry then it may as well be deemed bigotry to be opposed to rape, incest, thievery, idolatry, slavery or even abortion and murder.
bump
Why trust a guy who can’t tell the difference between his butt and a vagina?
I really do not care that he is gay.
He is a socialist and failed mayor.
He offers this nation nothing but poor policy choices.
There are plenty of homosexual conservatives that I would happily vote into office.
Many people will rush to vote for Butt just like they did for Barack Hussein right after 9/11. They do it to advertise how hip and cool they are. It has nothing to do with choosing the best to lead the country.
If you believe people are born automatically attracted to one sex or the other (born straight or gay), but don't believe people are automatically born one sex or the other (not born male or female)...you might be a Democrat. :)
talking with fellow workers and everyone agrees that there are quite a lot of Americans that have no clue he is gay. This will only spell disaster for the democrats the more they and the media keep it under the radar.
Google some pics of Pete kissing his husband for a cold slap in the face. I’m not a homophobe but I can’t reconcile the thought of an outwardly gay, married, president and the image it portrays domestically, internationally, morally, etc.
I’m struggling with it. I have no defense if someone says I’m a bigot because I can’t put into words what it is that makes me recoil so much on this. I would feel the same if he were a republican.
Like who?
Ditto.
As I said elsewhere, the day America votes for a homosexual for president is the day God will lift His hand of protection off of this nation.
Being homosexual and conservative is a lot like being Christian and Muslim. Conservatives differ with libertarians over values. Conservative values do not accept sexual perversion. Period.
“ If Elizabeth Warren and Hillary Clinton are more “manly” than Mayor Pete how are countries hostile to America going to react to his administration?”
They may continue to be hostile.
All life focuses on reproducing itself. Species have awesome and beautiful ways to accomplish this — the peacock’s plumage, the moth’s pheromones, the lightning bug’s flashing.
Anything that blocks this core genetic program’s drive is, by definition, unnatural and abnormal. Were it normal, life systems would weaken and fail. Note - this has nothing to do with religion; zero.
I do not hate, nor have phobias about, vomit, rabid animals, lightning storms or psychotic people. I just have a normal and healthy caution of or distaste for them.
Mayor Pete is the son of a famed Marxist professor of english at Notre Dame. He used his academic position to advance his agenda to destroy our American culture and system of government, including our religious institutions. And what did Notre Dame do about it? Apparently nothing.
I would take this article even more seriously if the word “gay” was replaced with “homosexual.” Stop calling homosexuals “gay,” there is nothing “gay” about their lifestyle!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.