Thank you, Oklahoma. You hadn’t made the headlines for such a long time that I had forgotten all about you. Now, you put yourself back on the map with a vengeance and unleash a rock hard, throbbing pillar of Christian righteousness right into the spotlight for all to see.
I give you Peter LaBarbera, leader of the organization called “Americans for Truth About Homosexuality“. Please visit the site. It does not disappoint … although you might want to clear your browser history afterward. For example, this is on their front page:
BREAKING: Obama Champions Gay Task Force’s ‘Creating Change’ Conference – Which Promotes ‘Kinky Sex’ (Sadomasochism) and Multi-Partner Unions; Event Funded by Southwest Airlines, Office Depot, AARP and Wells Fargo
Mr LaBarbera himself is (self?) described as civil and cordial … not the “angry homophobe” as so many of us radical homosexual activists desperately wish to portray him. The problem is that attitude only goes so far. Mike Huckabee seems like the kind of guy you wouldn’t mind having a beer with, but once you listen to the things he has to say, you begin to wonder if they’ll pack your Guinness in a doggie bag.
As one who rejects the notion of inborn “gay” identity (“orientation”) and who believes that homosexual practice is always wrong but that people can leave the homosexual lifestyle, LaBarbera does not fit the liberal caricature of the angry “homophobe,” even as some homosexual activists try to portray him as such. He debates the issue with civility—even when his homosexual opponents refuse to do so …
It really doesn’t matter if you’re civil or not. If you believe things for which there is no evidence – for the sole purpose of supporting an agenda that involves treating people like second class citizens based on who they are attracted to – then it makes you a homophobe. Whether you’re angry about it really doesn’t make a difference.
So do I have a point to all of this? Maybe. As I’m trying to remember what it is, allow me to share with you his latest claims, and their far reaching implications in the world of biblical law …
Peter LaBarbera of Americans For Truth About Homosexuality, invited Oklahoma pastor James Taylor, onto his show, during which they say, despite both being listed as “abominations” in Leviticus, eating pork and shellfish is okay because of the invention of refrigerators, but gay sex is not, because there is no equivalent to refrigeration.
I’ll give you two, genius: penicillin and condoms.
And, since you’ve created the precedent that biblical law can be countermanded because of the advancements of modern technology, I think we can all agree that from this point onward any and all sexual activity between consenting adults is no longer sinful.
Thanks, Peter LaBarbera, for paving the way for the normalization of homosexuality in our society! We couldn’t have done it without you!
Mr Taylor said: “Some things are cultural and there are also some things that have happened now in terms of refrigeration and health concerns and those are some of those things that are there. But the reality is it doesn’t change the fact that God has said a man shall not lie with a male like a woman and vice versa and he uses the word abomination, which is the strongest word in the Bible for hate that you can come across.”
The reality is that if homosexuality (especially male-male) was forbidden as a way to prevent an easy vector of disease transmission, then the combination of modern medicine and a strong public health awareness of safe sexual activity cover that one pretty well. Especially when you consider that during ancient times, they’d just be stoned to death so … yeah, anything is a step forward.
If, on the other hand, the prohibition of homosexuality was based on establishing an identity unique to the Canaanites, I am fairly confident that virtually every other aspect of our culture as it exists today does a good enough job that we don’t have to rely on that one anymore.
And finally, if it was simply a visceral response to a Bronze-Age understanding of human sexuality (i.e. “we’re not quite sure of the science behind how babies are made but we’re pretty certain that’s not it …”), then may I suggest that our knowledge base in this field has grown by orders of magnitude since then. As a result, I think we’re in a somewhat better position to understand the implications, long term effects, and even some potential causes of homosexuality without resorting to calling it a sin and running away, screaming.
He continued: “So that’s the problem, they want to pick and choose what they want to have and then to dismiss it as this isn’t what the Bible says, it’s foolishness.”
So we have a guy who is using passages of Leviticus to tell us that homosexuality is still a sin … when in Leviticus 20:13 it states:
13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.
Now I, for one, am glad that you’re choosing only the first part of that sentence to provide you with moral guidance and ignoring the rest. As I said yesterday, we have secular morality to thank for that. But don’t call anyone to task for cherrypicking the bible when you know full well what the punishment for homosexuals and adulterers are in the Old Testament … and no amount of refrigeration or penicillin will make that one go away.
Now, of course, I have this image in my head of a half-empty jar of gay sitting in the refrigerator next to the butter dish. What’s the consistency? Is it like Nutella, perfect for crepes or eating straight from the jar? Or is it more like demi-glace, where you add just a little to a soup or stew to add depth and complexity?
Or have I given this way too much thought, and forgotten how to wrap it up? Yeah, I think so.